Softpanorama
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)

Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool

News Purple revolution Donald Trump -- an unusual fighter against excesses of neoliberal globalization Recommended Links The Deep State Trump vs. Deep State Do the US intelligence agencies attempt to influence the US Presidential elections ? History of American False Flag Operations Did Obama order wiretaps of Trump conversations
National Security State The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Fake News scare and US NeoMcCartyism Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin Hillary Clinton email scandal Anti Trump Hysteria Michael Flynn Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism
 Zombie state and coming collapse of neoliberalism Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Hillary Clinton and Obama created ISIS  American Exceptionalism  Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism The Iron Law of Oligarchy Nation under attack meme
Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Myth about intelligent voter Libertarian Philosophy Pluralism as a myth Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters Doublespeak New American Militarism Bait and Switch
The Deep State Corporatist Corruption Predator state Neocons Myth about intelligent voter Resurgence of neo-fascism as reaction on neoliberalism Corporatism National Security State Deception as an art form
Libertarian Philosophy The Iron Law of Oligarchy Principal-agent problem Neoliberalism US Presidential Elections of 2012 Non-Interventionism Skeptic Quotations Humor Etc

Introduction

The de-legitimization of the government via leaks,  using of a pack of dogs in the form of controlled by coup leaders MSMs ( leaks about corruption  is a traditional tool in color revolutions. )

Those fake charges about "election irregularities" also used in the several color revolutions in the past (the Orange Revolution in Ukraine is one example) to successfully to overturn the results of election.  That's actually one of the favorite tool of the State Department in such operations. So Hillary and her supporters within the State Depratment should be  well trained in this craft. They have the audacity to launch this dirty game ont he USA people.

Iinitially Hillary actually tried using Green Party of a Trojan horse, but this failed. Then Podesta decided to try "Russian hand" to overturn the result of the elections and was considerably more successful. Not without help of some officials in three-letter agencies (Brennan and , who amplified the story and provided the leaks necessary to keep the Russiagate story hot.

One objective is to keep in place an anti-Russian policy. The coup’s instigators want to prevent Trump from letting up on the pressure (sanctions) on Russia and from cooperating with Russia. The coup forces are neocons fifth column in Washington. A second objective is to maintain the positions, power, and influence of the coup’s seekers, which are alliance of neocons and Clinton DemoRats (neoliberal interventionalist such as Samantha Power and Susan Rice). The only difference between them is that neocon place Israel interests first while neoliberal interventionalists place the interest of transnational corporations first.  none of them care much about interests of ordinary Americans which delegated to the  role of financial donors for those wars and cannon fodder.

The set of leaks were designed to create a hysteria which allows to appoint  a Special Prosecutor for Trump. which happened via Obama appointee in Justice Department, the same that recommended to Trump to fire Comey.  So this goal in the color revolution plan was achieved without any Congress action.

It is unclear why this idea about Russian corruption is being pushed after April, 2017, as it is clear that Trump folded to neocons. Probably the goal to remove  Trump and install Pence as the President is still intact.

The net result of this very well financed and very dirty disinformation propaganda complains  in which all major US MSMs play the role of "foot soldiers" of this color revolutions is that the majority of American are already successfully brainwashed and poisoned by anti-Russian witch hunt. and effects of this neo-McCarthyism campaign will laset a decade or more. So neocons won again, and  American people were played as patsies again, and again. As already happened during Bush Ii administration when the USA was pushed ito war in Iraq. So this is the second "Big Lie"  campaign is less then 20 years.

This new variant McCarthyism, with Russia serving as a scapegoat instead of the USSR  proved to be very efficient method to block any rapprochement with Russia and any attempts to stop neocons wars in ME, especially Syria adventure in which neocons sides with Islamic jihadists.  And like in case of Senator McCarthy witch hunt, which actually lasted almost a decade, the whole political atmosphere in the USA was poisoned to the extent that  Russia  has nowhere to go. It was firmly pushed in Chinese's hands.

Trump proved to a weakling unable to stop the series of very damaging leaks and fire and prosecute perpetrators on those acts. His decision not to prosecute Clintons was probably a grave mistake which sealed his fate. This decision allowed this campaign to be started by Podesta and friends.  Hillary actually know quite a lot about Watergate investigation, because she was a part of it. In 1974, Clinton became a member of the presidential impeachment inquiry staff during the Watergate scandal. I n 2008, a reporter named Dan Calabrese wrote an article that claimed that “when the investigation was over, Zeifman terminated Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation.” The article quoted Zeifman as saying: “She was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”  (The Washington Post -- which naturally tried to swipe this under the rug):

There is no actual quote from Zeifman saying he fired her. Moreover, in other interviews, Zeifman acknowledged that he did not fire Clinton. In 1999, nine years before the Calabrese interview, Zeifman told the Scripps-Howard news agency: “If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her.” In a 2008 interview on “The Neal Boortz Show,” Zeifman was asked directly whether he fired her. His answer: “Well, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions.

He still some chances to counterattack this dirty campaign if he take investigation of Seth Rich murder under personal control (and he  can direct FBI to investigate DNC corruption as well),  but other then that that he does not have good counter moves. As of July 2017 with the Special Prosecutor firmly in place, the plotters are close to winning.

In such cases you are guilty, unless proved to be innocent. After appointing of the Special Prosecutor it actually does not matter whether Trump Russia contacts contain anything illegal at all. Dirt will be found, because the Special prosecutor is not bound to Russia probe and can dig the dirt on Trump from other areas, keeping him the hostage of "deep state". Obstruction of justice is one "rubber stamp" changes in such cases and it will probably be used to unseat Trump.   As Michael S. Rozeff  noted:

...This is a “seed crystal” coup. The model for the seed crystal coup is the Watergate scandal. The operational goal is to crystallize and solidify the disunited Trump opposition into a movement that has irresistible momentum. In much the same way that seed crystals can accelerate a phase change from liquid to solid, the coup perpetrators introduce reports, accusations, and leaks over time in order to create the impression that a widening scandal is occurring. Each component has no merit but the media accept them at face value and provide publicity that creates new adherents and coherence among the anti-Trump forces. The anti-Trump forces are anxious to replicate the success in getting Nixon to resign.

Q. What is the role of the establishment media in the coup?

A. The anti-Trump media are critical in this effort. The anti-Trump media keep up a drumbeat of anti-Trump reporting. They slant the news, manufacture stories, repeat them and create fake news. They try to convince the public that the coup’s promoters are on the side of the angels (as in protecting national security and the election system’s purity) and Trump is on the side of the devils (as in making concessions to a dangerous foe and being too respectful to Putin). The media must paint Russia and Putin as enemies for this propaganda effort to succeed. The media provide a focal point that coordinates the coup’s backers even if they never sit down and conspire with one another. Everyone can observe the media stories and through that the effects of their anti-Trump leaks, reports, and innuendos. This allows them to plan their next moves.

Q. What is the role of social media in the coup attempt?

 A. Social media have played a role in uprisings during the Arab Spring. The same thing can happen in America. There is a host of groups who are anti-Trump on grounds other than Russia. They can coordinate through social media. These groups seek to de-legitimize Trump so as to maintain items on their agenda. Aides to Hillary Clinton’s failed campaign are now piling on to the effort.

These groups are distinct from the coup’s perpetrators. They might launch a coup attempt of their own or they may become a front line of the existing coup, that is, merge with it as a force to reckon with that Trump has to address.

Q. How do you answer those who deny that there is an ongoing coup attempt?

A. Positing a coup attempt is the simplest and most comprehensive hypothesis that ties together and explains a host of known facts that we know have occurred. Being a model of events, it is imperfect; but it’s better than no model because it still helps us to understand what’s going on. We are not seeing a train of unconnected events that just happen to be anti-Trump. It is easier to understand it as a concerted effort going on to emasculate the Trump presidency and possibly see him replaced; and that effort is centered in the CIA.

The people behind the coup are operating partly openly and partly covertly. They are not so far using military means or physically threatening means so that the coup is not clearly recognizable as such. They are more like sharks circling their intended victims, with each one being hungry and attacking its own, as opposed to making pre-arranged attacks. Their coordination is achieved through publicity and a common goal.

We can see these attacks, and they show a pattern, a common goal and a recognizable origin, primarily among U.S. intelligence agencies, especially the CIA.

Q. What attacks are you referring to?

A. The first victim was Paul Manafort who resigned in mid-August 2016 as Trump’s campaign chairman. His lobbying efforts on behalf of the ousted head of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych, resulted in a dirt campaign against him. That attack stemmed from anti-Russian sources in Ukraine whom the U.S. government supports. Attacks from foreign origins conceal their true U.S. origins. They are a sign of a CIA operation behind the scenes.

The second victim of the coup is Michael T. Flynn, who resigned as Trump’s National Security Advisor after only three weeks in that post. Leaks of tapped phone calls showed that intelligence operatives were behind this shark attack.

Q. Who is behind the coup attempt?

A. Mainly, unnamed intelligence officials and operatives who are in the CIA or recently retired from such. A number of media outfits are exceptionally active in propagating negative headlines and stories about Trump and his administration. Elements of other intelligence agencies and departments of government are possibly involved. We do not know the names of those operating against Trump, and this is a weakness of the coup hypothesis.

Q. When did the coup attempt begin?

A. Its foundation was laid in 2016 by accusations of Russian interference in the election. The coup began in earnest as soon as the election in November 2016 made Trump the winner.

Q. What evidence points to the CIA’s role in the coup attempt?

A. A news report from September 5, 2016, reports that “U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies are investigating what they see as a broad covert Russian operation in the United States to sow public distrust in the upcoming presidential election and in U.S. political institutions, intelligence, and congressional officials said.”

On Jan. 14, 2017, a news report states that the CIA set up a task force in 2016 to investigate possible Russian funding of Trump’s campaign. The task force included the FBI, the Treasury, and Justice Departments, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Agency (NSA).

Q. Why did the CIA set up a task force to investigate Trump’s campaign?

A. Why did the CIA not set up a task force to investigate Hillary Clinton’s activities during and after being Secretary of State in response to receipt of mammoth amounts of foreign money that were laundered through the Clinton Foundation? The reason is that she was the candidate favored by the CIA leadership and Trump was not.

Early in 2016, Trump was raising very strong doubts in the intelligence community that he’d govern as they saw fit.

On February 24, 2016, ex-CIA chief Hayden said he’d be “frightened” of a Trump presidency. He said, “I would be incredibly concerned if President Trump governed in a way that was consistent with the language that candidate Trump expressed during the campaign.” A news report told us “Former CIA director Michael Hayden believes there is a legitimate possibility that the U.S. military would refuse to follow orders given by Donald Trump if the Republican front-runner becomes president and decides to make good on certain campaign pledges.”

A month later, Hayden opined that Trump was a larger threat to national stability on security matters than Hillary Clinton.

On April 11, 2016, we learn that CIA Director “Brennan said on NBC News Sunday that he would not allow enhanced interrogation tactics, including waterboarding, even if a future president ordered it.” Trump wasted no time responding: “Donald Trump is taking on CIA Director John Brennan on torture, saying Brennan’s pledge not to allow waterboarding is ‘ridiculous.’”

On July 13, 2016, Brennan testified that he’d consider quitting rather than obey a president’s order to reinstate waterboarding, something that Trump had suggested. Another article says that even before that date, “[Brennan] has already expressed his distaste for Trump.”

There is ample evidence in the form of sharp public bickering between Trump and these two CIA chiefs, present and the past, that the CIA set up a task force to investigate Trump’s campaign as a weapon against Trump and his possible election. The motive behind the investigation was not to ensure a clean campaign free of Russian influence but to work against Trump’s election chances. The CIA was dismayed by what appeared to them to be a possible president who was aiming to work with Putin and not against him.

Q. But wasn’t the CIA doing the right thing to investigate possible Russian funding of the Trump campaign?

A. The idea of Russian funding of Trump’s campaign was absurd. This investigation had no reason to be started other than a goal of smearing Trump and preventing a Trump presidency. It was absurd because foreign money given to American political campaigns is illegal and everyone knows it. Trump would not jeopardize his campaign for some trivial amount of money nor would his campaign officials; and a large amount would easily be spotted through the banking system. It was also absurd because the Kremlin would not operate and does not operate in this way. It would not risk being found out blatantly violating American law in this way, as that would greatly diminish its credibility. “Doing the right thing” for the American system was strictly a plausible and disingenuous device.

Q. If the investigation was absurd, what leads or allegations did the CIA have to set it up?

A. The excuse was an allegation that three of Trump’s associates had received campaign money from the Kremlin. This allegation came from a Baltic state and it was processed by the CIA and made into something worthy of following up. We read that the task force “…was set up after the director of the CIA, John Brennan, received a recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into Trump’s campaign coffers, the BBC’s Paul Wood reported. The recording was apparently passed to the CIA by the intelligence agency of one of the Baltic States.”

According to this, John Brennan is the key player in the anti-Trump movement. He wants to see Trump’s presidency brought to a quick end or otherwise neutered and made compliant to rule by the CIA. By their control over information and its interpretation, the leaders of the CIA have gained considerable power within the government. They’ve enhanced this by developing operational forces in the field.

As occurred during the propaganda campaign that preceded Bush 2’s attack on Iraq and as in the Ukraine case noted above, we again observe murky foreign sources that are given credence and validity by the CIA. The public and media have no viable way of checking on the story of Kremlin money except perhaps through off the record sources. Such stories can’t be traced through public hearings without subpoena power and a will to wash a lot of dirty linen in public. They are perfect for propaganda and cover-ups.

John Brennan has the CIA initiate an investigation on a flimsy basis and gets away with it. We know from his public statements at that time and later that he’s thoroughly anti-Trump and anti-Russia. This is why such an investigation went forward. Brennan had nothing to lose. If he found some dirt on Trump or his associates, he’d discredit Trump and lose him votes. If he didn’t find anything, the investigation itself would still raise suspicions about Trump and provide Hillary Clinton and her aides with anti-Trump ammunition. In fact, her campaign did use the alleged Russian connection against Trump.

Q. What else do we know of Brennan’s differences with Trump?

A. On Sept. 11, 2016, Brennan disagreed with Trump publicly: “CIA Director John Brennan pushed back against Donald Trump’s claim that he could read disapproval of President Barack Obama’s policies in the body language of the intelligence officers who gave him a confidential national security briefing.”

On November 30, 2016, we read that Brennan expressed another difference with Trump: “The director of the CIA has issued a stark warning to President-elect Donald J. Trump. Tearing up the Iran nuclear deal would be ‘the height of folly’ and ‘disastrous.’”

On January 3, 2016, Charles Schumer said that Trump was “being really dumb” for arguing against the assessments of the intelligence community on Russian hacking. He adds ominously: “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

On January 15, 2017, we read “CIA Director John Brennan on Sunday had a stern parting message for Republican Donald Trump days before he assumes the U.S. presidency, cautioning him against loosening sanctions on Russia and warning him to watch what he says. Brennan rebuked the president-elect for comparing U.S. intelligence practices to Nazi Germany in comments that laid bare the friction between Trump and the intelligence community he has criticized and is on the verge of commanding.”

Q. What became of the allegations against the three associates of Trump?

A. The three accused men each strongly denied allegations of being paid by the Kremlin. On October 15, the FISA court granted a warrant to intercept communications from two Russian banks. The investigators were looking for evidence that money passed from Russia to the three Trump associates. No such evidence was found.

On January 19, 2017, the continuing investigation by “American law enforcement and intelligence agencies” was confirmed, and Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager, was mentioned:

“The counterintelligence investigation centers at least in part on the business dealings that some of the president-elect’s past and present advisers have had with Russia. Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia’s Federal Security Service, one of the officials said.”

Mr. Manafort has done nothing illegal, we learn. He has merely done some business in Ukraine and Russia. He merely came into contact with people with suspected links to a Russian intelligence outfit. They weren’t even known spies. Mr. Manafort has fallen victim to suspicion by association two or three times removed even from guilt by association.

The other two being investigated are Carter Page and Roger Stone, and we learn that they too are innocent of wrongdoing.

“The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said.”

So, we know that a concerted effort has been made to investigate three of Trump’s close aides. We know that the CIA was the instigator and that it used its typical murky and unverifiable tips to gain credibility. Finally, we know that this inquiry has produced no evidence of any illegal activities of Trump or his aides.

Q. What other evidence is there of an attempted coup against Trump?

A. On Oct. 7, 2016, there was released the “Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security”. This brief statement on behalf of U.S. intelligence agencies linked the Russian government to hacking: “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.” It stated its belief “that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”

On Nov. 30, 2016, an outfit named PropOrNot with links to the U.S. intelligence community published a report that named 200 websites as propagators of Russian propaganda: “Russia Is Manipulating US Public Opinion through Online Propaganda”.

On Dec. 9, 2016, it was reported that “The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency…”

Dec. 29, 2016, arrived the FBI-DHS report: “Grizzly Steppe – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity”. This was widely denounced as lacking even persuasive circumstantial evidence, never mind direct evidence of Russian involvement.

On Jan. 10, 2017, the Golden Showers report was leaked, accusing Trump of having been compromised by Russian agents and therefore subject to blackmail. This report had been circulating for weeks in intelligence and media circles. It had supposedly been written between July and December by former British MI-6 agent, Christopher Steele.

Once again we observe that a spurious anti-Trump report is purported or arranged to have a foreign origination; but that it is carried to the public by means of the CIA and leaks within the U.S.

On February 13, 2017, the coup perps drew fresh blood when Michael Flynn resigned, despite no evidence of wrongdoing. Their success is attributable to their use of wiretapped phone calls and to leaking these to the media. Since intelligence agents have access to these calls that the NSA collects, we once again observe that intelligence circles are active in seeking to undermine Trump. This is consistent with the conclusion that a coup attempt is ongoing.

Q. Could you summarize, please?

A. In 2016 Trump and the CIA became foes of one another because of vast policy differences. Past and present CIA directors went public against Trump. They instigated a series of reports and leaks to discredit Trump and to link his campaign to Russian meddling in the election. They went after several of his aides, causing Paul Manafort to resign. After the election, they produced new anti-Trump material and managed to get his National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, to resign. This adds up to an attempted coup that has had some success.

Q. What happens next?

A. The future is guesswork. We will be surprised at what happens, but here are some guesses. The coup attempt will not cease. There is nothing presently opposing it unless Trump is counterattacking behind the scenes, of which there is no evidence. Trump will eventually sense the coup’s efficacy and devise ways to stop it. The anti-Trump media will keep the pot boiling. They will need new stories to exploit. Anti-Trump elements in the CIA can be expected to come up with new, dubious and devious revelations aimed at discrediting Trump’s handling of foreign affairs. We can expect former intelligence officials to speak out against Trump at critical times and to recruit allies who will add what appears to be an even more independent criticism of Trump. The coup may transform into an effort to control Trump’s policies from outside his administration.

 

In other words the plotters already paralyzed Trump and his administration.

Self-destructive character of this exercise

Leak destroy trust and create atmosphere of paranoia. They also increase inclinations to launch  "a small, victorious war" to distract from internal problems. On Foreign Policy website Micah Zenko wrote that there is a danger that the Trump administration might attempt to wage a war to lessen the pressure from Russiagate. Steve Bannon is probably the only antiwar member of Trump administration. Almost everybody else actually want a war. Even even Bannon views are suspect (The Guardian, Feb 1, 2017)

WSJ is not happy with such a development as you can see from the column Anti-Trump Democrats Invite Chaos - WSJ by Ted Van Dyk published on May 21, 2017 5:44 p.m.  He makes several good point about self-destructing character of this exercise:

218 COMMENTS

‘A jackass can kick down a barn,” said the legendary Speaker Sam Rayburn. “But it takes a carpenter to build one.” Democrats should reflect on that wisdom as they consider the special counsel now appointed to investigate President Trump’s alleged ties to Russia. In the short term, the inquiry will probably hurt Mr. Trump and feed attempts to drive him from office. But in the end the president’s attackers will pay a price.

The political and media hysteria surrounding the Trump administration lies somewhere on the repulsiveness scale between the Jacobin excesses of the French Revolution and the McCarthy era. Thus far the public knows of no presidential action that would justify impeachment. Never mind, the crowd cries, let us have the verdict now. We can do the trial later.

What about discussions between Trump campaign advisers and Russian or other foreign leaders? Don’t they count as high crimes and misdemeanors? No, such conversations take place all the time in national campaigns.

What about the firing of FBI Director James Comey ? Wasn’t that suspicious? No, Mr. Comey disregarded the Justice Department chain of command and the normal proprieties of his office. He made public statements about ongoing investigations. He allowed it to leak that the president had suggested leniency for Mike Flynn, the former White House adviser now under investigation. A presidential suggestion of that nature would be neither illegal nor unprecedented.

What about Mr. Trump’s disclosure of classified information during a meeting with Russian leaders? It’s a tempest in a teapot. The president has the authority to classify or declassify information as he wishes. I have witnessed other presidents doing it.

What about Mr. Trump’s executive order declaring a short-term pause on immigration from countries with active terrorist movements? It may have been poorly handled, but other presidents have done similar things.

What about all Mr. Trump’s flip-flopping? Shouldn’t a president be trustworthy and reliable? Yes, but when Mr. Trump has reversed his campaign pledges it has been mostly for the good.

If Mr. Trump were a conventional president, these missteps would be shrugged off as growing pains or considered worthy of only mild reproof. President Trump, it is true, lacks the knowledge, experience and temperament for the office. His crude narcissism is grating. He has carelessly contributed to his problems with heedless public statements. He nonetheless was duly elected and should be given the leeway that new presidents are traditionally afforded.

Critics, moreover, misread the temper of the American people. Most voters don’t much like Mr. Trump. But they like chaos less. I spoke recently to a Democratic group consisting mainly of Bernie Sanders supporters. Many were searching for a constructive response to the Trump presidency. They were people, as the saying goes, seeking to light a candle rather than curse the darkness. I suggested that they concentrate on developing alternatives to Mr. Trump’s proposals—on health care, taxes, the budget. “You mean we should help Trump?” someone asked. “No,” I answered, “you should help your country.” I was surprised by the outburst of applause that followed.

Democrats, in their all-out opposition to Mr. Trump, are missing real opportunities to influence policy. The tax-reform debate is a prime example. If Democrats were shrewd, they would try to negotiate a grand compromise, in which loopholes are scrubbed from the code and Social Security and Medicare put on sounder long-term footing. But to get there, purposeful polarization must give way to constructive engagement.

Trump haters disregard an old rule of politics and history: In the end, voters always choose order over disorder. Kicking Mr. Trump to the curb wouldn’t return the country to the pre-Trump status quo. It would likely bring forth new law-and-order leadership more disciplined and conservative than Mr. Trump’s.

Mr. Van Dyk was active for more than 40 years in Democratic administrations and campaigns, including as Vice President Humphrey’s assistant in the White House.

Comey testimony confirms the worst suspicions

In hearings at the Intelligence Committee of the US Congress the former director of the FBI Comey made great efforts to put Trump in a very bad light.

Comey testiphony: speculative….conclusory…..ad hominem…vague…petitio principii…..et cetera..
http://www.wben.com/articles/comey-testimony-video-clips-minute-minute-summaries

After Comey testimony it is clear that Trump fired him for good reasons and should have done this earlier: among other things Comey artificially hold Trump Russiagate "hot" and Hillary "emailgate" cold:

After six months of investigation the FBI had no evidence for any of the rumors about Russian interference [in U.S. elections] that were thrown around. It should have closed the case with a clear recommendation not to prosecute the issue. [...]

That Comey kept the case open was political interference from his side. Hearings and public rumors about the case blocked the political calendar.

Comey testimony proved to be damaging for Trump and some parts of it are definitely a  thinly veiled revenge of the fired FBI director. That's given. Comey tried to play russian car on flynt saying that the president, on February 14, told the then-FBI chief that he hoped he could find a way to not investigate National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, a comment Comey saw as an attempt to influence him as a Director of FBI. That's a clear backstabbing.  Note also salacious reminder  "had not been involved with hookers in Russia" in the following quote:

On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI. He described the Russia investigation as “a cloud” that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia. He asked what we could do to “lift the cloud.” I responded that we were investigating the matter as quickly as we could, and that there would be great benefit, if we didn’t find anything, to our having done the work well. He agreed, but then re-emphasized the problems this was causing him. Then the President asked why there had been a congressional hearing about Russia the previous week – at which I had, as the Department of Justice directed, confirmed the investigation into possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Comey was the leaker to NYT

The most interesting part is that Comey was the actual leaker to NYT.  A very nice for FBI director behavior :-). Also the attempts to remove Trump in which he, Clapper and Brennon are engaged (which means efforts to install Pence)  can be traced to certain politicians (with the last names starting with C, O and  B) and "deep state", which since JFK assassination replaced the "surface" state (elected officials). Making the latter just a tool for the legitimization of the regime. In other words Bolshevism won in Cold War: it poisoned the USA institutions and recovery is probably very difficult, if possible at all.  Welcome to the USSR, where Politburo was de-facto ruler of the country and controlled the "semi-elected" government.

So it now looks like "Russiagate" from the very beginning was a "false flag operation" run by neocons and Clinton and Obama loyalists (especially in MSM) and certain members of intelligence agencies designed to remove Trump.

As unqualified as Trump proved to be as POTUS,  he still was elected by approximately half of the US voters (and if we remove results from NY, Boston, San Fransisco and Los Angeles by the dominant majority of population).  Cosmopolitan city population preferred Clinton for obvious reason -- it get the loot from the neoliberal globalization.

In other words, we now are watching yet another "soft coup", a color revolution implemented int he USA (State Department is the command center for such things in foreign countries -- in a way it is yet another 19th intelligence  agency in the USA).  "Purple revolution" against Trump is based of series of well coordinated leaks and the hysteria in MSM that the elections were hijacked by Trump using Russian hackers (the charge that election were corrupted by the winner is a typical theme of the color revolutions, for example the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine in 2004 which installed Viktor Yushchenko as president). 

The US MSM are playing the role of NGOs in "Purple revolution".  But continuing it after April, 2017 does not make much sense because Trump folded and adopted neocon foreign policy.  Still it is continued. 

 Pat Buchanan made some interesting observations on July 8, 2017 in his article  Pat Buchanan The Impeach-Trump Conspiracy (VDARE )

All the synthetic shock over what Kushner or Sessions said to Kislyak aside, this city's hatred for President Trump, and its fanatic determination to bring him down in disgrace, predates his presidency.

For Trump ran in 2016 not simply as the Republican alternative. He presented his candidacy as a rejection, a repudiation of the failed elites, political and media, of both parties. Americans voted in 2016 not just for a change in leaders but for a revolution to overthrow a ruling regime.

Also MSM try to present possible instances of corruption (which is a norm for both the businessmen and politicians under neoliberalism as the slogan is "Greed is good") as treason (Ann Coulter Press Barking (Mad) Up The Wrong Tree

Meanwhile, it is a known fact that the FBI is looking at Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. It is a known fact that the Kushner family has used its connections to President Trump to drum up Chinese investors for the family’s real estate portfolio. It is a known fact that Jared is looking for investors in his 666 Fifth Avenue building, which is underwater. It is a known fact that Jared met with the Russian ambassador—as well as a representative of a state-owned Russian bank—during the transition. It is a known fact that he neglected to mention those meetings on his security clearance forms.

All of this is probably perfectly aboveboard. But if you weren’t insane, the blindingly obvious question would be: Why did Kushner meet with the head of a state-controlled Russian bank?

That’s not what our media want to know! Reporters see all those facts, put 2 and 2 together and ask: How does this advance the narrative that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign to steal the election from Hillary?

This is why the press blared alarmist headlines about Kushner’s attempt to set up a “back channel” with Russia, a fact as important and disturbing as the square footage of Jared’s office.

Liberals are desperate for anything sneaky with Russia because, unfortunately, there is still neither a coherent theory, nor any evidence, of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign to sway the election.

The argument is that Russia hacked John Podesta’s emails and turned them over to Wikileaks in order to reveal to American voters that the Democratic National Committee … conspired against Bernie Sanders! And that would have swung the election against Hillary because—well, actually, there’s no theory on how it was supposed to work, exactly, but liberals believe that trained Russian spymasters thought it was a capital idea.

Buttressing this crackpot theory, there is, helpfully, zero evidence. Despite the FBI investigating alleged Russian collusion for nearly one year now, there’s still not a speck of evidence that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign, only insinuations and dramatic headlines.

The FBI itself never investigated the DNC email leaks, but outsourced review of the Democrats’ servers to a cyber-security firm hired by the DNC. It raised no red flags with our Jacques Clouseau-like FBI that the DNC’s chosen investigator, CrowdStrike, is affiliated with a fanatically anti-Russian Ukrainian billionaire

CrowdStrike’s smoking gun proving a Russian plot to elect Trump was the fact that the malware program used against the DNC was identical to a malware program used by the Russians to disable 80 percent of Ukraine’s howitzers in its war with Russian separatists in 2014.

Except then it turned out that: a) Russia isn’t the only hacker with that malware; b) Ukraine’s howitzers hadn’t, in fact, been disabled; and c) Ukraine’s howitzer app had never even been hacked.

Other cyber-security firms scoffed at CrowdStrike’s report, explaining that the “Fancy Bear” malware allegedly found in the DNC hacks may have originated with Russia, but once Russia had used it, every hacker had it. As cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr explained to The Miami Herald, malware isn’t “a bomb or an artillery shell. (It) doesn’t detonate on impact and destroy itself.”

As long as we’re calling for investigations of any kook theory, how about an independent commission to investigate whether Sen. Chuck Schumer is a child molester? Schumer was Anthony Weiner’s mentor, which is already more evidence than the media have for their Russian collusion story.

True, I don’t have proof that Schumer is a child molester, but I just started this investigation! Was there collusion between Schumer and Weiner in the selection of the underage girl Weiner sexted with? Neither man has yet issued a full and convincing denial.

Obviously, the point of an independent investigation isn’t to find any actual wrongdoing. It’s to hurt Trump. But if that’s your objective, American media, as loath as I am to give you helpful suggestions, the wafer-thin evidence that exists all points to Kushner, not collusion

Looks like DemoRats (Clinton neoliberal democrats and neocons) are destroying remnants of election democracy in the USA, if we assume that such remnants still exist (Trump now is just a placeholder, not a real president; foreign policy issues are decided by other people in dark suits). 

But at the same time neoliberalism is on retreat despite successful counterattacks in Argentina, Brasil and France.  the problem is the  we have no viable alternative to neoliberalism as return to New Deal capitalism is now probably impossible as management  class switched sides in 80th and now is aligned with capital owners, destroying the political coalition which made the New Deal Capitalism possible.

The Bush II period joke that the  Congress and US government are "neocon occupied territories" within the USA )much like Palestine in Israel)   sounds now even more true then before 9/11.  And have currency outside alt-right (which should be understood as anti-war right, not  as neonazy right as NYT tried to paint them; look at Bannon platform) And the fact that none of neocons went to jail for staging Iraq invasion (Wolfowitz was slapped on the wrists by blowing out his dallainace with World Bank employee and sending him packing from this lucrative position)  confirms that :-)

I also like the girl who leaked NSA document to Intercept. Especially the name :-).   How 25 years old got access to documents related to Russia being a translator from several Arabic languages (and probably pretty dumb as a computer user)  is an interesting  question to ask.  Somebody probably helped her.   At least Snowden was a system administrator.


Top updates

Softpanorama Switchboard
Softpanorama Search


NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jun 20, 2017] In Final Oliver Stone Interview, Putin Predicts When Russia-US Crisis Ends

Notable quotes:
"... "You've gone through four U.S. presidents: Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump. What changes?" Stone asks him. ..."
"... "Almost nothing. Your bureaucracy is very strong and it is that bureaucracy that rules the world," he says. Then, solemnly, "There is change...when they bring us to the cemetery to bury us." ..."
"... PUTIN: We didn't hack the election at all. It would be hard to imagine any country, even Russia, being capable of seriously influencing the U.S. election. Someone hacked the DNC, but I don't think it influenced the election. What came through was not a lie. ..."
"... They were not trying to fool anybody. People who want to manipulate public opinion will blame Russia. But Trump had his finger on the pulse of the Midwest voter and knew how to pull at their hearts. Those who have been defeated shouldn't be shifting blame to someone else....We are not waiting for any revolutionary changes. ..."
"... TRUMP: I hope I get along with Putin. I hope I do. But there is a good chance that I won't. ..."
"... PUTIN: It almost feels like hatred of a certain ethnic group, like antisemitism. They are always blaming Russians, like antisemites are always blaming the Jews. ..."
"... The editors then flashed to footage of John McCain on the floor of the Senate ranting and raving about Putin. Then Joseph Biden in the Ukrainian parliament, ranting about Russia. Putin tells Stone all of this is unfortunate. He thinks their view is"old world." He reminds Stone that Russia and the U.S. were allies in World War I and World War II. It was Winston Churchill that started the Cold War from London, despite having respect for Russia's strongman leader at the time, the real dictator, Joseph Stalin. ..."
Jun 20, 2017 | www.forbes.com
But with Trump in the White House, the Trump-Putin conspiracy theory is one reality TV show the news media can't shake. Stone's love for foreign policy intrigue at least makes him a Putin kindred spirit here. America's age old fear of the Russians, has made Putin public enemy number one and Stone his sounding board. For some unhappy campers, like John McCain, Putin has " no moral equivalent " in the United States. He's a dictator , a war criminal and tyrant .

"You've gone through four U.S. presidents: Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump. What changes?" Stone asks him.

"Almost nothing. Your bureaucracy is very strong and it is that bureaucracy that rules the world," he says. Then, solemnly, "There is change...when they bring us to the cemetery to bury us."

In the last installment of the Putin interviews, the Russian leader admitted to liking Trump. "We still like him because he wants to restore relations. Relations between the two countries are going to develop," he said. It's a sentence very few in congress would say, and almost no big name politicians outside of Trump would imagine saying on television. On Russia, you scold. There is no fig leaf.

In a recent sanctions bill in the senate, only Republicans Rand Paul and Mike Lee voted against it, making for a 97-2 landslide in favor of extra-territorial sanctions against Russian companies, namely oil and gas.

Stone asked him why did he bother hacking the Democratic National Committee's emails if he believed nothing would change on the foreign policy front.

STONE: Our political leadership and NATO all believe you hacked the election.

PUTIN: We didn't hack the election at all. It would be hard to imagine any country, even Russia, being capable of seriously influencing the U.S. election. Someone hacked the DNC, but I don't think it influenced the election. What came through was not a lie.

They were not trying to fool anybody. People who want to manipulate public opinion will blame Russia. But Trump had his finger on the pulse of the Midwest voter and knew how to pull at their hearts. Those who have been defeated shouldn't be shifting blame to someone else....We are not waiting for any revolutionary changes.

Just then, editors cut to a video of Trump talking about Putin.

TRUMP: I hope I get along with Putin. I hope I do. But there is a good chance that I won't.

PUTIN: It almost feels like hatred of a certain ethnic group, like antisemitism. They are always blaming Russians, like antisemites are always blaming the Jews.

The editors then flashed to footage of John McCain on the floor of the Senate ranting and raving about Putin. Then Joseph Biden in the Ukrainian parliament, ranting about Russia. Putin tells Stone all of this is unfortunate. He thinks their view is"old world." He reminds Stone that Russia and the U.S. were allies in World War I and World War II. It was Winston Churchill that started the Cold War from London, despite having respect for Russia's strongman leader at the time, the real dictator, Joseph Stalin.

See:

[Jun 10, 2017] Comey followed careful plan in leaking memos by Katie Bo Williams

Jun 10, 2017 | www.msn.com

James Comey's release of his memos to The New York Times was a carefully orchestrated act that appeared designed to shield him from any legal repercussions, whistleblower and ethics lawyers say.

While President Trump's personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, is reportedly preparing a leak complaint against Comey, experts say the fight over Comey's disclosures is more political than legal.

"It's clear that Comey understood the legal principles [protecting disclosures]," said Stephen Kohn, a lawyer who specializes in whistleblower cases.

But, he said, "Trump's lawyer was also smart because he's filing these complaints in places that don't mean anything. It's public relations."

The memos, which Comey wrote to contemporaneously document his encounters with the president, have become a flashpoint in the administration's response to the former FBI director's scathing testimony before a Senate panel Thursday.

In one of the most dramatic moments in Comey's remarks, he revealed that he had provided one of his memos to The New York Times through a trusted friend to prompt the appointment of a special counsel in the bureau's Russia investigation.

Trump on Friday morning branded Comey a "leaker" in a tweet and reports emerged that Kasowitz is planning to file a complaint with the Justice Department Inspector General as well as the Senate.

But the way Comey went about his disclosure makes it very unlikely that he is subject to any legal or administrative penalty, legal experts say.

"So long as he ensured the FBI had its own copy of the memos, and so long as the memos were not classified, Mr. Comey's actions appear to be entirely lawful," said Brad Moss, a lawyer who specializes in national security and security clearance law.

[Jun 09, 2017] Reality Check Suggests that Reality Winner is probably a patsy; also Reality Winner vs. Comey

Lesbian bodybuilder, "Black lives Matter" enthusiast, who claims "being white is terrorism" managed to get top security clearance. Something is fishy here.
Notable quotes:
"... With the announcement that 25-year old "Reality Winner" (no, really) had been arrested for stealing and leaking top secret documents, it became clear to us that a near and dear friend who was very ill for a very long time had finally been pushed over the brink: we regret to say that Satire is dead . ..."
"... Start with her name: "Reality Winner." Then let's tick off the other boxes: lesbian bodybuilder, ardent Bernie Sanders supporter, a "Black Lives Matter" enthusiast who (though white herself) argues that "Being white is terrorism." A woman whose social media posts include referring to the President of the United States as a "piece of shit" and the "Tangerine in chief," who additionally declares that in a war between the US and Iran, she'll side with Iran. ..."
"... And still...STILL...she was given a top secret security clearance and access to classified materials. Which raises two very troubling questions: just what in blazing Hell does someone have to do to not get a security clearance, and how many other angry, ignorant, communist-leaning, anti-American social justice warriors are currently embedded in (and sabotaging) our intelligence agencies?! ..."
"... "And still...STILL...she was given a top secret security clearance and access to classified materials." Can you say "P A T S Y"? As in fall guy...er...gal? ..."
"... Manchurian lesbian bodybuilder. MK-Ultrabot. ..."
"... FBI CIA NSA a complete joke......you really cant blame Reality there even Comey is a leaker himself lol ..."
"... So why is it illegal when Winner leaks, and legal when a high US official like Comey does the same? ..."
"... She likely was a plant assigned there to leak top secret info. Paid to? ..."
Jun 09, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by via Stilton's Place blog ,

With the announcement that 25-year old "Reality Winner" (no, really) had been arrested for stealing and leaking top secret documents, it became clear to us that a near and dear friend who was very ill for a very long time had finally been pushed over the brink: we regret to say that Satire is dead .

Because seriously, when a story gets this "in your face" ridiculous - what details are left for us to push to humorous extremes?!

Start with her name: "Reality Winner." Then let's tick off the other boxes: lesbian bodybuilder, ardent Bernie Sanders supporter, a "Black Lives Matter" enthusiast who (though white herself) argues that "Being white is terrorism." A woman whose social media posts include referring to the President of the United States as a "piece of shit" and the "Tangerine in chief," who additionally declares that in a war between the US and Iran, she'll side with Iran.

And still...STILL...she was given a top secret security clearance and access to classified materials. Which raises two very troubling questions: just what in blazing Hell does someone have to do to not get a security clearance, and how many other angry, ignorant, communist-leaning, anti-American social justice warriors are currently embedded in (and sabotaging) our intelligence agencies?!

We're guessing the number to be terrifyingly high, but can't know for sure because trying to find out would require functional intelligence agencies. And that ship, like Satire, has sailed.

E-Knight •Jun 9, 2017 10:54 AM

Yet another victim to the hyper neo-liberal propaganda...sad.

Pure Evil -> Erek •Jun 9, 2017 11:05 AM

If she hates white people. Why didn't she at least get a tan to cover up all that white skin? Dye her hair black and put it in a fro? Learn Ebonics and talk street?

Lesbian bodybuilder, that's so white bread.

Cognitive Dissonance -> Pure Evil •Jun 9, 2017 11:34 AM

"And still...STILL...she was given a top secret security clearance and access to classified materials." Can you say "P A T S Y"? As in fall guy...er...gal?

Urban Roman -> Cognitive Dissonance •Jun 9, 2017 11:57 AM

Manchurian lesbian bodybuilder. MK-Ultrabot.

Manipulism •Jun 9, 2017 10:57 AM

As George Webb said, they had a contest for this job and she was the Winner.

Herd Redirection... -> Manipulism •Jun 9, 2017 11:15 AM

She just comes across as some sort of golem. A figment of someone's iMAGInation.

CosmoJoe -> Kreditanstalt •Jun 9, 2017 11:56 AM

It could be argued that Edward Snowden did the country a service. What did this dummy really do? And it is one thing to do something for love of country that gets you into trouble, but this idiot clearly has no love *at all* for this country or the people that live here. Side with Iran? Seriously?

This dumb bitch (and I use the term loosely) has a serious libtard brain disease.

Piranha •Jun 9, 2017 11:02 AM

FBI CIA NSA a complete joke......you really cant blame Reality there even Comey is a leaker himself lol

Smedley's Butler •Jun 9, 2017 11:02 AM

It was disclosed in court yesterday that she also had a thumbdrive full lof data, not just the 5 page document. This thumbdrive will reveal secrets about the NGA program as well as (false) evidence of Russian hacking that will be tied back to witness testimony by compromised hackers being held by the FBI. Impeachment to follow.

This story is much bigger, and just a part of yesterday's play.

Son of Captain Nemo •Jun 9, 2017 11:19 AM

After 9/11, followed by Bill Binney, Tom Drake and Russell Tice the new ship sailed... and it WILL NEVER be anything but a source for "do whatever they want you to do in completing the mission(s)" as the only brain trust(s) that mattered vacated after that "LAST MOST IMPORTANT NAIL" hit the coffin!

Rinse and repeat for DOD with the likes of Hugh Shelton, Tommy (aw shucks) Franks, Martin Dempsey and of course MAD "mad dog" they had to "scrape the scrape" off the bottom of the barrel to find... In hindsight we should have had the "watershed" long before September 11, 2001 as the "professionals" in the intelligence community were seeing how bad it was getting before the Gulf War.

Followed by the road to nowhere in the Balkans when in fact they knew that NATO should have been irrelevant by 1999 with it's losses! If there is any redeeming feature to the statements Miss Reality probably never made I would concur with her position on Iran!

Too bad she doesn't feel the same way about Russia but then again I'm about 99.99999% sure all of her statements came from somewhere else.

Lea •Jun 9, 2017 11:05 AM

So why is it illegal when Winner leaks, and legal when a high US official like Comey does the same?

quesnay -> Lea •Jun 9, 2017 11:34 AM

Because the US is now a third-rate banana republic. Consistency of law is for civilized societies, the company of which we left some time ago.

Trifecta Man Jun 9, 2017 11:06 AM

She likely was a plant assigned there to leak top secret info. Paid to?

kidinwyoming -> Trifecta Man Jun 9, 2017 12:09 PM

Comey exonerated Trump. This is about keeping the pressure on Russia now.

Thom Paine Jun 9, 2017 11:07 AM

I think Loretta Lynch may also get a Reality Check before Congress now.

[Jun 09, 2017] James Comey Admits He Leaked Information To Media by sundance

Notable quotes:
"... This behavior clearly indicates that James Comey was a political animal first and foremost, who politicized and weaponized the FBI to his own personal and institutional benefit. ..."
Jun 08, 2017 | theconservativetreehouse.com
Good grief is this man absorbed with his own need for attention.

Fired FBI Director James Comey admitted today that he was a direct source for leaking information to the media through a friend of his, a professor at Columbia University.

This behavior clearly indicates that James Comey was a political animal first and foremost, who politicized and weaponized the FBI to his own personal and institutional benefit.

watch-v=l0Wt33_UWPE

[Jun 09, 2017] GOP senator threatens to subpoena firm tied to Trump dossier

Notable quotes:
"... Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is threatening to subpoena a firm tied to the controversial opposition research dossier on President Trump. ..."
"... Grassley, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who now heads Fusion GPS, warning that that if he refused to "comply voluntarily" with the committee's request senators "will begin consideration of compulsory process under its rules." ..."
"... The New York Times reported earlier this year that Fusion GPS was hired to conduct opposition research in September 2015 by a GOP donor opposed to Trump. In June 2016, the firm hired Steele to investigate any ties between Trump and Russia and, according to the Times, then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton 's campaign paid the firm for the research after it became clear that Trump would be his party's nominee. ..."
Jun 09, 2017 | thehill.com
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is threatening to subpoena a firm tied to the controversial opposition research dossier on President Trump.

Grassley, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who now heads Fusion GPS, warning that that if he refused to "comply voluntarily" with the committee's request senators "will begin consideration of compulsory process under its rules."

"Your attorney has failed to sufficiently explain your claims that responding to the Committee's requests would infringe upon or violate your and/or Fusion's First Amendment rights, attorney-client and attorney work product privileges, and confidentiality agreements," Grassley wrote in a letter released on Friday.

Grassley is giving Simpson until Wednesday to respond to his letter and hand over "responsive documents."

The back-and-forth comes as Grassley is digging deeper into former British spy Christopher Steele's controversial dossier, which alleges that the Russians had compromising information on the president. Grassley sent a letter to Fusion GPS in March requesting information on the dossier, as well as details on Steele's hiring, and asked if it had shared information with the FBI.

But lawyers for the firm said on April 9 that the letter "calls for information and documents protected by the First Amendment rights, attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, and contractual rights (e.g., confidentiality agreements) of Fusion GPS and/or its clients."

Grassley argued that the firm hasn't been able to give a "clear explanation of the basis for the claimed privileges and rights." "Based on the minimal and vague explanations your attorney has provided, the Committee cannot adequately assess your claims. Thus, we must presume that they are unfounded," Grassley wrote.

The New York Times reported earlier this year that Fusion GPS was hired to conduct opposition research in September 2015 by a GOP donor opposed to Trump. In June 2016, the firm hired Steele to investigate any ties between Trump and Russia and, according to the Times, then-Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton 's campaign paid the firm for the research after it became clear that Trump would be his party's nominee.

[Jun 09, 2017] Tucker Carlson Lays Waste to Comeys Testimony and Democrat Attempt to Unseat the President

Notable quotes:
"... Everything about Comey is wrong. The fact that he felt the need to 'take notes' because the President asked for loyalty is fucking absurd. What sort of example did he make for fellow G men when he referred to his dealings with his commander in chief as being 'slightly cowardly'? The whole thing is rot, helping to fuel a bogus investigation spearheaded by a broken democratic party who have lost their fucking mind. ..."
"... He also touched upon the mercenary media's fake news about Trump, provided by bad sources, which was confirmed by Comey today. ..."
"... Don't forget it was McCain who took the 'pee' dossier that had been floating around DC which was so phoney even the media wouldn't touch - and told Comey to investigate. ..."
"... This is nothing less than a coordinated overthrow of the government by the deep state, media and uniparty ..."
"... So what do we need special counsel Mueller for in light of all this? Everyone knows the whole Russia collusion affair is politically motivated BS and deflection. ..."
"... Not to mention Comey handing out immunity deals like Christmas candy on Hillary's email investigation. Why would he do that? ..."
"... Comey took notes because he planned to blackmail Trump in the future just like J Edgar Hoover did when he ran the FBI. ..."
"... "Politicized" by the global central banks who own and operate virtually all world governments. I believe we need to keep the players very CLEAR in our minds. It's all of us; humanity, against the globalists who want us dead. Politicians, our institutions... all are aligned with the globalist psychopaths. It's that simple. ..."
"... Comey makes a memo, because that is the M.O. of the FBI. He fully expects gullible sheeple to believe any written statement by an FBI agent is truth, rather than a manipulating fake. ..."
"... Comey has admitted to a number of criminal acts ..."
"... Comey and his FBI partner should be legally charged by the Justice Department for releasing his FBI Memo to NY Times. His FBI partner should be fired and charged. They had no authority to release private government information and breach confidentiality with the president of the United States. The memo proved nothing and meant nothing but releasing it by a fired employee and FBI partner is a breach to FBI and the office of the president of the USA. ..."
"... Not one coward on that Senate committee had the balls to ask about the Seth Rich investigation........disappointing ..."
"... Comey also stated as 100% undisputed fact that Russia had "meddled" with the election. Again, no proof was cited, yet not a single Republican asked for such proof, nor has Trump managed to articulate a similar request. This is somewhat disturbing. ..."
"... The threat of being "Clintoned" is a powerful force. ..."
Jun 08, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

There will come a day when the city square will be packed with gibbets filled with swinging heads of traitorous bastard commies -- most readily found in leftshit cities. The degeneracy must end. Today's testimony by Comey was a farce, a transparent attempt by a spent and bitter bureaucrat trying to hurt a sitting President.

Everything about Comey is wrong. The fact that he felt the need to 'take notes' because the President asked for loyalty is fucking absurd. What sort of example did he make for fellow G men when he referred to his dealings with his commander in chief as being 'slightly cowardly'? The whole thing is rot, helping to fuel a bogus investigation spearheaded by a broken democratic party who have lost their fucking mind.

Tucker chimes in and reviews the day's events, pointing out the hypocrisy of Comey and his dealings with AG Lynch, who asked for Comey to word the investigation of Hillary Clinton's email scandal as a 'matter.' If that's not collusion and political pressure on the FBI, nothing is.

He also touched upon the mercenary media's fake news about Trump, provided by bad sources, which was confirmed by Comey today.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/tHtP2gQIoCE

rosiescenario , Jun 9, 2017 12:31 PM

After watching this political circus it is very clear that no one should be re-elected from either party, with the single exception of Paul.

Looks like what we really need is a new political party that actually serves the public tax payers, unfortunately it may take a major financial depression and its accompanying turmoil to bring that about.

Blazing in BC , Jun 9, 2017 12:25 PM

He seems to have blown his lead, I mean load, to no avail.

mary mary , Jun 9, 2017 12:14 PM

IMHO, the Comey hearing was John McCain's chance to redeem himself, and he blew it. I think his idea to go after Comey's interactions with the Obama regime was a great idea, but he came unprepared and unrehearsed. McCain had an opportunity to display leadership, but he failed to lead.

SummerSausage - mary mary , Jun 9, 2017 12:38 PM

Don't forget it was McCain who took the 'pee' dossier that had been floating around DC which was so phoney even the media wouldn't touch - and told Comey to investigate.

It's time 81 year old McCain - last in his Naval Academy class - shuffled off to an assisted living center in Arizona.

Tortuga , Jun 9, 2017 11:39 AM

These paris, comey, collusion, russki hoaxes are for 1 reason only; distraction to delay the "hanging".

http://skylarkutilities.com/video/watch/vid01SzjDOwbt8S8

SummerSausage , Jun 9, 2017 11:03 AM

Great post, as usual, Fly.

Comey created a memo because it's hard to leak to multiple sources at one time in person.

We're living history folks. This is nothing less than a coordinated overthrow of the government by the deep state, media and uniparty dominated by leftojihadis. The Gang of 8 is composed of 4 dimocrites and 4 rinos. The rinos had a duty to come forward and not only refute the lies in the media but to reveal it all as a hoax. Only Nunes told President Trump what was going on and he was forced to recuse himself from the intelligence committee investigation.

Even an atheist has to admit there's divine intervention at work here. Flawed though he admits to be, Trump is being guided and protected by a force more powerful than the swamp.

markar , Jun 9, 2017 10:22 AM

So what do we need special counsel Mueller for in light of all this? Everyone knows the whole Russia collusion affair is politically motivated BS and deflection.

Jim in MN - markar , Jun 9, 2017 10:34 AM

So he can quietly wander over and start pulling the illegal wiretap files that the Obama Stasi were compiling. Other than that, no point.

SummerSausage - Jim in MN , Jun 9, 2017 10:43 AM

But Mueller won't. He & Comey are besties of 25 year standing. All Mueller will do it find no direct links between the Russians and Trump or his administration but justify Comey's investigation by saying the Russians are bad, evil people who were trying to co-opt naive and inexperienced Trump colleagues.

If they wanted an honest and truthful investigation they would not have selected a retired swamp general.

ClowardPiven2016 - PitBullsRule , Jun 9, 2017 10:49 AM

It scares me that people actually believe this shit. I guess we are doomed considering how many morons like PitBullsRule are lapping up the koolaid with their heads in the sand

barysenter - PitBullsRule , Jun 9, 2017 10:18 AM

Reality doesn't conform to your expectations much? HA HA

Northern Flicker , Jun 9, 2017 9:44 AM

Not to mention Comey handing out immunity deals like Christmas candy on Hillary's email investigation. Why would he do that?

Comey's (limited hangout) strategy: Say a few things to look honest, so he could sell "the Russians did it (hack)" - despite showing no evidence. Otherwise, there would be no need for a Special Counsel and he knows Mueller will forment more troubles for Trump, perhaps for years. Trump needs to end this Russian hack nonsense ASAP.

Tachyon5321 , Jun 9, 2017 8:51 AM

Comey took notes because he planned to blackmail Trump in the future just like J Edgar Hoover did when he ran the FBI.

Kayman - Tachyon5321 , Jun 9, 2017 9:47 AM

Comey wouldn't state, "We are not investigating you, Mr. President." Yet....

Downtoolong , Jun 9, 2017 8:44 AM

I'd like Loretta Lynch to show me where in the FBI handbook it explains the proper procedure for conducting "matters".

They just make shit up to suit their needs. The Comey incident is another sad example of how every branch of government and every agency has become politicized by both sides, to the point they can no longer perform their intended function.

SummerSausage - Downtoolong , Jun 9, 2017 10:55 AM

The law does not allow subpeonas or grand juries based on "matters" - only valid "investigations".

Tell me how that is not Lynch & Comey colluding to interfere in the election and obstruct justice. I'm willing to listen with an open mind.

adanata - Downtoolong , Jun 9, 2017 9:51 AM

"Politicized" by the global central banks who own and operate virtually all world governments. I believe we need to keep the players very CLEAR in our minds. It's all of us; humanity, against the globalists who want us dead. Politicians, our institutions... all are aligned with the globalist psychopaths. It's that simple.

SoDamnMad - Downtoolong , Jun 9, 2017 9:26 AM

"how every branch of government and every agency has become politicized by both sides, to the point they can no longer perform their intended function" and should therefore be disbanded. Fixed it for you.

GotAFriendInBen , Jun 9, 2017 8:26 AM

Repeat lies often enough and they become the truth

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-lawyer-cites-questionable-timeline-dis...

Reaper , Jun 9, 2017 8:24 AM

Comey makes a memo, because that is the M.O. of the FBI. He fully expects gullible sheeple to believe any written statement by an FBI agent is truth, rather than a manipulating fake. Trump's possible recording constrained Comey's M.O..

scoutshonor , Jun 9, 2017 7:43 AM

Nobody will do anything about any of this. Time to shitcan the lot of them. I hope not a single doofus up for re-election goes back to D.C. in '18.

It's hard to know which to slap first, those that break the law out in the open--or those that turn a blind eye to the flagrant lawlessness of the trangressors.

This is some weak-ass tea.

Thom Paine , Jun 9, 2017 7:35 AM

Comey has admitted to a number of criminal acts I think.

There are a few crimes there that I gather the DOJ has no option but to prosecute, how can it not? Since they are also prosecuting Winner for the exact same thing?

Jim in MN - Thom Paine , Jun 9, 2017 10:31 AM

He stole government property (the memos).

boattrash - Thom Paine , Jun 9, 2017 8:04 AM

All good points you listed, yet the fucker didn't see the need to take notes during the 4th of July weekend interview of Hillary? WTF?

Kayman - boattrash , Jun 9, 2017 9:45 AM

Why would Comey make notes of receiving payment from the Clinton Foundation?

SummerSausage - Kayman , Jun 9, 2017 11:07 AM

It's all here http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=72788

Comey got rich covering up for the Clintons and swamp rats.

SithApprentice , Jun 9, 2017 7:23 AM

Comey thought he would be the next J Edgar Hoover and now he is unemployed and hopefully a pariah. Two-faced ass.

New_Meat - SithApprentice , Jun 9, 2017 8:40 AM

with a $10MM book advance

gregga777 , Jun 9, 2017 6:52 AM

Feral Bureau of Weasels Head Weasel James Comey said that he behaved 'slightly cowardly'. Well, that is the sort of behavior one expects from a Weasel.

[No insults intended to the small mammals grouped together in the weasel family.]

DarkestbeforeDawn , Jun 9, 2017 6:25 AM

Tucker distills gale wind force BS into an easily digestible summary. I'd watch him live every night, but I don't watch TV anymore

alphasammae , Jun 9, 2017 12:17 AM

Great review Tucker Carlson! Comey is a disgruntled loser like Killary. Comey never followed up on Seth Rich murder, a more serious matter than playing stupid politics.

Comey and his FBI partner should be legally charged by the Justice Department for releasing his FBI Memo to NY Times. His FBI partner should be fired and charged. They had no authority to release private government information and breach confidentiality with the president of the United States. The memo proved nothing and meant nothing but releasing it by a fired employee and FBI partner is a breach to FBI and the office of the president of the USA.

gregga777 - alphasammae , Jun 9, 2017 6:55 AM

Feral Bureau of Weasels Head Weasel James Comey was actively covering up for the murderers who murdered Seth Rich and the people who hired them. He should be shitting whole goats knowing that Attorney General Sessions seized everything in his office while he was in LACALIFUSA. Comey will probably be joining Obama shortly wherever it is that he is hanging out overseas.

Bytor325 - alphasammae , Jun 9, 2017 5:59 AM

Not one coward on that Senate committee had the balls to ask about the Seth Rich investigation........disappointing

francis_the_won... - Bytor325 , Jun 9, 2017 9:27 AM

Comey also stated as 100% undisputed fact that Russia had "meddled" with the election. Again, no proof was cited, yet not a single Republican asked for such proof, nor has Trump managed to articulate a similar request. This is somewhat disturbing.

Got The Wrong No - Bytor325 , Jun 9, 2017 6:17 AM

The threat of being "Clintoned" is a powerful force.

[Jun 09, 2017] Comey rips media for dead wrong Russia stories

Notable quotes:
"... "Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials," the Times wrote. Cotton asked Comey if that story was "almost entirely wrong," and Comey said that it was. ..."
"... The Times has run one meaningful correction to that report, saying it overstated the number of people whom the FBI has examined. The Times report did note, however, that so far intelligence officials had seen no evidence of "cooperation" between the Trump campaign and Russia. ..."
"... "In the main it was not true," Comey said. ..."
Jun 09, 2017 | thehill.com
Former FBI Director James Comey repeatedly warned Thursday that news reports based on leaks of classified information pertaining to the Russia investigation have been consistently wrong.

In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Community, Comey said stories about Russia that are based on classified leaks have been a persistent problem for the FBI because news organizations have often received bad information.

"There have been many, many stories based on - well, lots of stuff, but about Russia that are dead wrong," Comey said.

Sen. Tom Cotton Tom Cotton Trump's 'infrastructure week' goes off the rails New York Times responds to Comey's challenge of its story Comey rips media for 'dead wrong' Russia stories MORE (R-Ark.) asked the former FBI director about a bombshell New York Times report from Feb. 14 titled "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence."

"Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials," the Times wrote. Cotton asked Comey if that story was "almost entirely wrong," and Comey said that it was.

The Times has run one meaningful correction to that report, saying it overstated the number of people whom the FBI has examined. The Times report did note, however, that so far intelligence officials had seen no evidence of "cooperation" between the Trump campaign and Russia.

"But the intercepts alarmed American intelligence and law enforcement agencies, in part because of the amount of contact that was occurring while Mr. Trump was speaking glowingly about the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin," the Times wrote.

"In the main it was not true," Comey said.

But in an analysis of Comey's comments on Thursday evening, the Times argued that sources cited in the Feb. 14 article have vouched for the account put forth, though the newspaper's reporters were not able to contact them immediately after Comey's testimony.

The analysis raises the possibility that Comey could have been disputing the article's characterization of Russian intelligence officials.

Another possibility, according to the Times, is that Comey may have disputed with the newspaper's description of the evidence as "phone records and intercepted calls."

Comey said incorrect reports are frustrating because the FBI's policy is not to comment on the media's coverage of its investigations.

"The challenge - and I'm not picking on reporters - about writing stories about classified information, is the people talking about it often don't really know what's going on, and those of us who actually know what's going on are not talking about it," Comey said. "We don't call the press and say, 'Hey, you got that thing wrong.' "

Trump has repeatedly railed against "fake news" and the media's reliance on unnamed sources.

CNN this week had to issue a correction after it reported that Comey would testify that he never told Trump that he wasn't the target of an investigation.

[Jun 08, 2017] Comey opted for revenge

Jun 08, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
"In that testimony he had already disclosed that Trump demanded his "loyalty" and directly pushed him to "lift the cloud" of investigation by declaring publicly the president was not the target of the FBI probe into his campaign's Russia ties."

Oh OK so Trump MADE the little bitch state that he (Trump) was not the target .Really!!

"Former FBI Director James Comey says if FBI agents knew the president had asked him to drop an investigation into the former national security adviser, it would have a "real chilling effect" on their work.

Comey says he decided not to tell agents working on the Russia investigation about what he perceived to be a request from the president to drop the probe into Michael Flynn.

Comey says even as good as the agents are, hearing that the president asked for this could be detrimental. He says, "that's why we kept it so tight."

Comey testiphony: speculative .conclusory ..ad hominem vague petitio principii ..et cetera..
http://www.wben.com/articles/comey-testimony-video-clips-minute-minute-summaries

[Jun 08, 2017] Comey apparently admit leaking stuff to New York Times

Notable quotes:
"... Except for the fact that Comey admitted he is a leaker, has a network through which he has leaked information designed to harm President Trump. ..."
"... Oh, and that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and other Obama administration officials may have engaged in serious misconduct worthy of further investigation–which Comey testified about today. ..."
Jun 08, 2017 | www.breitbart.com

UPDATE 12:50 P.M. As the public part of the hearing adjourned, and Comey has completely vindicated Trump ahead of a later closed session hearing where he and senators are likely to discuss classified information he could not bring up during the televised hearing, the whole thing turned out exactly like Breitbart News Network told you it would: A giant nothing-burger.

Except for the fact that Comey admitted he is a leaker, has a network through which he has leaked information designed to harm President Trump.

Oh, and that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and other Obama administration officials may have engaged in serious misconduct worthy of further investigation–which Comey testified about today.

UPDATE 12:37 P.M. Their hopes and dreams dashed by Comey completely vindicating Trump in this open hearing, and instead implicating ex-Obama administration officials like Loretta Lynch–and implicating himself as an anti-Trump leaker with a network through which he has leaked damaging information against the president–the left and media are pinning everything on a last ditch line of questioning from Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA).

This line of questioning from @SenKamalaHarris regarding the Attorney General is extraordinarily important – not to be overlooked

- Matt House (@mattwhouse) June 8, 2017

Here's video of her comparing Trump to an armed robber though, so take whatever she says with a grain of salt:

Sen. Kamala Harris seems to compare Trump to an armed robber saying "I hope you will give me your wallet" #ComeyTestimony pic.twitter.com/2yjfV3UyIM

- Mike Ciandella ن (@MikeCiandella) June 8, 2017

Meanwhile, anti-Trump Never Trumper Max Boot is in an alternate reality, saying Comey was fantastic as a witness.

Bottom line for #ComeyDay : Comey a highly credible witness. Trump isn't. Comey makes damning accusations. Trump denials unconvincing.

- Max Boot (@MaxBoot) June 8, 2017

Flashback, though, to when Comey was fired and Boot with some bold predictions back on May 9:

Congress needs to ask Comey to testify & he needs to tell all he knows about Kremlingate. If he does Trump may regret firing him.

- Max Boot (@MaxBoot) May 10, 2017

Don't tell Max Boot about the black helicopters coming for him. Seriously. "KREMLINGATE"? What is wrong with these people? Anyway, another wonderfully fantastic flashback of this Never Trumper from when Comey was fired in May:

Prediction: If Democrats take control of Congress in 2018, the firing of Comey will form one of the articles of impeachment.

- Max Boot (@MaxBoot)

Senators should ask Comey the name of the Columbia professor and then subpoena the memos from him.

- Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 12:21 P.M. Loretta Lynch is in serious trouble right now. Looks like the Democrats' efforts may have backfired.

Loretta Lynch is having a surprisingly bad day in the Comey testimony

- Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) June 8, 2017

If it wasn't for Trump becoming president, the corruption with Obama's Department of Justice would be a major story.

- Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) June 8, 2017

Comey also just testified that he did not believe that Lynch could "credibly deny" the Hillary Clinton email scandal investigation, and that she had a serious conflict of interest. He also testified in exchange with Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the Senate Majority Whip, that it is possible a special prosecutor was needed for the email scandal. He said he considered calling for appointing a special counsel in the scandal, but decided against it.

UPDATE 12:08 P.M. Oh my. Now confirmed leaker James Comey's leak network has been outed, or at least part of it has:

Only in Washington: Someone nursing a pint of beer shouts out to a crowded bar: "Daniel Richman of Columbia" https://t.co/hNXVbfBe8r

- Alexander Panetta (@Alex_Panetta) June 8, 2017

So the collusion involves former FBI director, mainstream media, and the left-wing academy to bring down the elected president #ComeyHearing https://t.co/sVWKpajWw9

- Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) June 8, 2017

And now Comey's anti-Trump leak network is confirming to the media that Comey is a leaker:

Columbia Law Prof Daniel Richman confirms to @ZCohenCNN that he is the friend that provided excerpts of the Comey memo to reporters.

- Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 12:05 P.M. There are now serious questions being raised as to whether Loretta Lynch, the former Attorney General from the Obama administration, will be subpoenaed to testify after this hearing where Comey has implicated her.

Legit question: is Loretta Lynch going to be subpoenaed as a result of this testimony?

- Mike Shields (@mshields007) June 8, 2017

Meanwhile, Comey's admission he is a leaker serious hurts him. Jonathan Turley of George Washington University Law School makes the case Comey may be in serious trouble:

Comey admits that he leaked the internal memo through a Columbia law professor in order to force Special Counsel. Yet, that raises questions

- Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 8, 2017

Comey is doing well but leaking info runs against Comey's image, particularly in light of the leak controversy hoiunding the Administration

- Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 8, 2017

The memos could be viewed as gov't material and potential evidence . Leaking to a friend for disclosure can raise serious questions.

- Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 12:02 P.M. Donald Trump, Jr., highlights an excellent question from Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) to Comey. Comey did not have a great answer.

Sen Blunt: If you told Sessions you didn't want to be alone with Trump again, why did you continue to take his calls?

- Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 12:01 P.M. From our RNC friends, here's video of Sen. Rubio crushing another leftist media narrative during his questioning of Comey.

Basically, Comey was so concerned about President Trump's conversations with him that he alerted exactly nobody who could do anything about it. In other words, this whole thing is a giant nothing-burger. Except for Comey implicating himself as a leaker.

UPDATE 11:58 A.M. Comey is in big trouble after this hearing. He admitted he's a leaker, and has an actual network through which he leaks information to the press. In addition, he withheld from leaking information that would have vindicated President Trump weeks ago. White House social media director Dan Scavino captures it clearly and concisely on Twitter:

Because if it was leaked that @realDonaldTrump was personally not under investigation- it would have crushed the entire narrative. pic.twitter.com/drFcCxin5M

- Dan Scavino Jr. (@DanScavino) June 8, 2017

President Trump still has yet to Tweet, so no free drinks yet here at Union Pub. Looks like the owners here made a smart decision since this place is standing room only right now.

UPDATE 11:54 A.M. Oh, man, this keeps getting better and better. Comey just shredded the Democrats AND now the fake news media.

Oh Boy. Comey says there have been many many stories based on classified information about Russia that are just "dead wrong"

- Maeve Reston (@MaeveReston) June 8, 2017

I wonder if any of the media outlets that have printed repeated stories on these matters will check their reporting again or correct it if they're wrong. Not holding my breath.

UPDATE 11:50 A.M. Comey has emerged throughout this hearing before the American people looking very much like a drama queen. One of the more memorable lines is when he says when Trump called him to ask him if he was free for dinner, he had to break a date with his wife.

Comey says Trump called him at his desk. "Free for dinner tonight?"
"I said yessir I had to call my wife and break a date with her."

- Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) June 8, 2017

That's not the only drama-filled Comey testimony:

COMEY JUST QUOTES HENRY 11 on what he thought Trump meant: 'Will no one rid me of this toublesome priest"

- Trip Gabriel (@tripgabriel) June 8, 2017

Meanwhile, even CNN's Jim Acosta–a vehemently anti-Trump media figure in the heart of the opposition party's mothership CNN–is joining in on the anti-Comey fun.

Giving info to media "like feeding seagulls at the beach?" Fact check: True.

- Jim Acosta (@Acosta) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 11:48 A.M. The leaky Capitol Hill GOP swamp aides are attacking Trump, despite the fact Comey has vindicated the president and implicated himself in potentially illegal leaks.

Senate R aide: Holding nose and defending Trump is taking a lot out of these GOP senators - and they will demand some kind of repayment

- Glenn Thrush (@GlennThrush) June 8, 2017

The fact that Swamp Creatures on the "Republican" side on Capitol Hill are throwing shade on their own president, and party, as the GOP and Trump likely emerge from today's masquerade mostly out of the woods is simply incredible but unsurprising. Swamp Things are going to Swamp.

UPDATE 11:45 A.M. Comey's open admission he orchestrated a potentially illegal leak puts him in serious potential trouble, the New York Times people note. That's the story folks. He vindicated Trump, and implicated himself. Wow, what a day.

Can't remember the last time someone in DC openly acknowledged orchestrating a leak - and without any senator having even asked.

- Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 11:39 A.M. CNN's Dan Merica says that President Trump's personal lawyer Marc Kasowitz will make a statement at the end of Comey's public testimony.

Marc Kasowitz, Trump's lawyer outside the White House, will make a statement at the end of James Comey's Senate testimony

- Dan Merica (@danmericaCNN) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 11:35 A.M. As Comey continues vindicating Trump and throwing Democrats like Lynch, Obama, and Clinton under the bus–presumably accidentally–the Washington, D.C., daydrinking party scene is in full swing:

Spotted at Duffy's Irish Pub in North DC:
"Comey is my homey." pic.twitter.com/kvGuaqEqsd

- Sharon Nunn (@sharonmnunn) June 8, 2017

Her "homey" James Comey, meanwhile, has actually admitted he is a leaker.

Flag: Comey says he had a friend of his leak the content of his memo to a reporter to hopefully prompt the appointment of a special counsel. pic.twitter.com/qICnQhI2te

- Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) June 8, 2017

Comey admits to @SenatorCollins that he asked a friend to leak the contents of his memo to NYT to prompt the appointment of Special Counsel.

- Joel B. Pollak (@joelpollak) June 8, 2017

Here's video of Comey admitting he has been leaking information to the media:

Here's how I leaked my Trump memo after Trump's "tapes" tweet

by: James Comey pic.twitter.com/9Z1QPPdcKD

- Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 11:32 A.M. While obstruction is now off the table for Trump, as Breitbart's Joel Pollak detailed, Breitbart's John Hayward notes that obstruction is back on the table for several leading officials from now former President Barack Obama's administration. Hayward says Congress needs to investigate Loretta Lynch, the former Attorney General, as well as Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton–the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee–for obstruction of justice.

Big takeaway from the Comey hearing: urgent need to investigate Loretta Lynch, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton for obstruction

- John Hayward (@Doc_0) June 8, 2017

UPDATE 11:29 A.M. Our very own Joel Pollak is out with another bombshell piece detailing how this hearing has shattered the media's and the Democrats' efforts to taint President Trump with "obstruction of justice."

"Democrats have hinged their hopes for impeachment - and reversing the 2016 elections - on the idea that Trump committed obstruction of justice. That case has now been smashed beyond repair," Pollak writes, pointing to a Comey exchange with Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID).

Read his whole story here .

[Jun 06, 2017] Do Not Trust The Intercept or How To Burn A Source

Looks more and more like psyop operation -- a part of a Neo-McCarthyism propaganda campaign.
Notable quotes:
"... So why even go out of your way to leak these supposedly worthless documents to the press in the first place? Who benefits? ..."
"... Deep state benefits - analysis(?) is leaked which show as you say no proof, but it keeps the anti-russia propaganda going for another month or so - just as the anti-trump deep state and media wants. Sigh. ..."
"... P.S if any of you get a chance try to catch the interview on RT where German journo, who is unfortunately dead, states categorically that CIA and his bosses would instruct him on what to write and how to write it. ..."
"... If Reality Leigh Winner goes to trial and receives serious prison time, then The Intercept was wrong, but until then I'll think she's a Clintonist useful idiot. ..."
"... That would be Udo Ulfkotte. He used to work for FAZ. You have to take into account that he tried to live from writing books after FAZ and conspiracy theories do sell. ..."
"... Greenwald and Poitras are now the only two people with full access to the complete cache of NSA files ... just Glenn and Laura at the for-profit journalism company created by the founder of eBay. ..."
"... CIA Agents Caught Red Handed Trolling Alternative Media Sites http://humansarefree.com/2017/06/cia-agents-caught-red-handed-trolling.html I think we talked about this years ago, in regards to Israeli paid trolls, but we've gone so far into the Panopticon control grid, what difference does it make. ..."
"... I also think, it is possible that Hillary Clinton and Putin had a very personal not so private war after Hillary announced that she would do everything to prevent a realignment of Post Soviet States. And employing Victoria Nuland to achieve just that. ..."
"... ...which of course how psyops works. Because this leak will fuel more of the Trump/Russian conspiracies and hatred in the MSM. ..."
"... Are you from one of those USG "perception management" projects? Well, if you are, American taxpayers should be pissed off if this is all the "best and brightest" can come up with. The USG IC has an annual budget of $65 billion so if this is a black op., they have more than enough money to be able to afford the arrest of the "leaker" and even pay for her to get decently lawyered up. ..."
"... This whole episode smacks of a psy-op to me. If - and this is a big if - the Russians did hack into any voting systems, I'd be more willing to believe it was to collect evidence of malfeasance on the part of our own government than it would have been to manipulate the results themselves. ..."
"... Important to note is that Putin just mentioned in his interview with Megyn Kelly that it doesn't matter who's president of the United States because no matter what, the policy remains the same. That's a pretty direct indictment of the integrity of US elections, so what better time to up the ante with respect to the obvious lies about Russian interference in our elections than right after Putin calls our elections Kabuki theater? ..."
"... Well for one she is not a whistleblower, she is another anti-Trump neocon working for the deep state. She I believe leaked material just to attack Trump and Russia even more with info, as we have seen so many times now past months. She nor we as readers have any idea if there is any truth to the claim to start with. So why leak it? Well obviously, like past months, some groups in our society benefit from this greatly. ..."
"... I haven't trusted The Intercept since they ran their hit piece on Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
"... Ghostship. True enough. But knowing it is still different from effectively dealing with it. The elite/CIA controlled mass media still has a lot of power to persuade people as do the corporations that finance political elections. As well as the people who make money from arms sales. These people who may be loosely referred to as 'deep state' don't want to give up any of that power/money. ..."
"... She follows a neocon agenda (war against afghanistan, war against Syria, hatered against Russia, hatred against foreign policy that Trump have i.e), she works for the deep state, she leak deep state material to smear her "enemies". ..."
"... Who are those who spread this bs to the MSM about Trump and Russia constantly for past months? Where does it come from if not from the deep state groups? ..."
"... Omidyar being behind the Intercept has always been an iffy proposition at best, and it has never sat well that Greenwald is apparently satisfied with such an arrangement. ..."
"... And you just know Mark Ames will have a piece up bashing Omidyar, Greenwald and Scahill. Speaking of Scahill, other than a weekly podcast, what exactly does he do for the Intercept? ..."
"... Greenwald is a self-serving hack and the Intercept functions alongside outlets like DemocracyNow! to provide a Democrat-friendly perspective on the world to people who think they are very "progressive". They will never challenge the fundamental precepts of US imperialism and the oligarchic powers behind it, or truly rock the boat. ..."
"... There's a chance they got played. As noted, the documents don't actual show evidence of actual interference with voting system beyond data gathering. ..."
"... Alternatively, the document was prepared in such a way that it was actually politically harmless but it could snare the leaker who would be triumphantly and publicly "executed". That can improve the discipline in the shop. ..."
"... This is silly nonsense. There is no difference at all between the neocons and the neolibs (the neolords). They come from exactly the same place and believe in exactly the same thing. Specifically, they are atychiphobs; they cannot endure any form of failure. So they always must attach themselves to whatever they perceive as the winning side. And ultimately rule the rest of the losing world. For them that's all there is; Hillary is an example, and most rich individuals also. They would absolutely prefer death to loserdom. So of course they have no concerns at all about the fate of the losers. They are all the same. ..."
"... Sounds like a con job from start to finish. Along the lines of bellingcat, SOHR ect. Just another method of disseminating propaganda. ..."
"... this whole thing is such a circus! and yes, the NSA has access to far more info than these stupid documents allude to, not to mention that the US has got to have some massive access to Russian data. ..."
"... I should add: If Putin were directly responsible for hacking anything, Clinton should kiss Putin's who-cares-what for waiting until AFTER the primaries. She got to be part of the final coin-toss. ..."
"... really, why is this NSA document even considered whistle-blowing? ..."
"... Setting aside the antics of the Intercept, let's consider how preposterous this story is at face value. She's basically a translator for a few Middle Eastern languages. So she's reading email or web sites or listening to phone calls and doing her translating thing. It's not like she's a high-level analyst preparing briefings for the National Intelligence director - she's a damn low-level translator (no offense to NSA translators out there). ..."
"... If Winner DID manage to stumble upon a Top Secret memo on her work network unrelated to her job, then her supervisor would have known it within minutes. Everything anybody does is constantly monitored and logged, right down to the keystroke. SHE would know that. In fact, she would be fired for not reporting this impossible access to top secret information immediately. She would be further punished for even having the document linger on her screen for more than a second or two. There's a reason they put TOP SECRET at the very top of every page. Classified documents also have their own security/surveillance/monitoring mechanisms. The document itself (or the document management system) knows or is told who is allowed to read it or even see that it exists. It would record her access, even if all the other security and monitoring software the agency had failed completely. So you get the idea. Even if she saw this document (unlikely) and did NOT report the inappropriate access, she would eventually be frog-walked out of the building before the end of the day. ..."
"... Top Secret documents (and their networks) do not allow you to print them at all, and certainly not on some random office printer. ..."
"... All modern printers and copy machines have an invisible watermark that identifies the time/date you printed a page and the serial number of the machine. If she copied it somewhere, then they copy can be traced to a certain machine and date/time. She's busted either way if the feds got their hands on it, and SHE KNOWS THAT. ..."
"... Sorry - but unless someone can prove she has an extra chromosome or two, I have to believe this is a charade. She won't go to jail because she's in on it with the NSA and it's not a real Top Secret document anyway. NO intelligence agency will ever verify or deny something you show them is either legitimate or Top Secret, so even that part is wrong. If you call them to ask about a document you have, they will politely put you on hold so they can dispatch some DHS thugs to kick in your door and retrieve said document - without telling you anything either way. ..."
"... I tend to agree with the hint, hint - #RealityWinner is an obvious PsyOp. Her employer probably had a deal for her - agree to be "used", play the part in a little prosecution game we'll have going, make sure you leak to Cook - and don't worry, you'll be well rewarded in the end. ..."
"... The timing of this leak and the choice of media outlet is very convenient for the Establishment Dems/Deep State Russia investigation. Leaking to the Intercept, which has credibility in the alternative media, would be a convenient way to get the story covered in the MSM and leftist media. It certainly helps to distract Berners from the Seth Rich story. Some interns at the Intercept did a sloppy job checking up on their source. ..."
"... thank you for this. i left a comment on that article yesterday about how dumb the technical aspects were and apparently you noticed as well (i also mentioned stuxnet as an example of what an effective and professional attack would actually look like). ..."
"... as i also mentioned: hillary won durham by a WIDE margin (almost 100k votes). seems like any "hacking" worked to her advantage, not trump's. ..."
"... i've been reading douglas valentine's book on the phoenix program and other CIA criminality https://www.amazon.com/CIA-Organized-Crime-Illegal-Operations/dp/0997287012 ..."
"... It looks like a real half-arsed psyops -- here is the "Russia did it" smoking gun we've all been waiting for and it gets sorta rolled out but not trumpeted hysterically. Why the Intercept? Why not the NYtimes or wapo? ..."
"... It's becoming more difficult daily to find something that doesn't stink. I see it as an attempt to further bury the censored NBC interview with Putin where he explained several hard truths, one of which I alluded to yesterday. Compare vid here, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/06/nbc-edited-out-putins-hard-truths-heres.html with uncensored one here, which includes transcript, http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/54688 ..."
Jun 06, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Yesterday The Intercept published a leaked five page NSA analysis about alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections. Its reporting outed the leaker of the NSA documents. That person, R.L. Winner, has now been arrested and is likely to be jailed for years if not for the rest of her life.

FBI search (pdf) and arrest warrant (pdf) applications unveil irresponsible behavior by the Intercept 's reporters and editors which neglected all operational security trade-craft that might have prevented the revealing of the source. It leaves one scratching the head if this was intentional or just sheer incompetence. Either way - the incident confirms what skeptics had long determined : The Intercept is not a trustworthy outlet for leaking state secrets of public interests.

The Intercept was created to privatize the National Security Agency documents leaked by NSA contractor Edward Snowden. The documents proved that the NSA is hacking and copying nearly all electronic communication on this planet, that it was breaking laws that prohibited spying on U.S. citizen and that it sabotages on a large scale various kinds of commercial electronic equipment. Snowden gave copies of the NSA documents to a small number of journalists. One of them was Glenn Greenwald who now works at The Intercept . Only some 5% of the pages Snowden allegedly acquired and gave to reporters have been published. We have no idea what the unpublished pages would provide.

The Intercept , a subdivision of First Look Media, was founded by Pierre Omidyar, a major owner of the auctioning site eBay and its PayPal banking division. Omidyar is a billionaire and "philanthropist" who's (tax avoiding) Omidyar Network foundation is "investing" for "returns". Its microcredit project for farmers in India, in cooperation with people from the fascists RSS party, ended in an epidemic of suicides when the farmers were unable to pay back. The Omidyar Network also funded (fascist) regime change groups in Ukraine in cooperation with USAID. Omidyar had cozy relations with the Obama White House. Some of the held back NSA documents likely implicate Omidyar's PayPal.

The Intercept was funded with some $50 million from Omidyar. It first hires were Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill and Laura Poitras - all involved in publishing the Snowden papers and other leaks. Its first piece was based on documents from the leaked the NSA stack. It has since published on this or that but not in a regular media way. The Intercept pieces are usually heavily editorialized and tend to have a mainstream "liberal" to libertarian slant. Some were highly partisan anti-Syrian/pro-regime change propaganda . The website seems to have no regular publishing schedule at all. Between one and five piece per day get pushed out, only few of them make public waves. Some of its later prominent hires (Ken Silverstein, Matt Taibbi) soon left and alleged that the place was run in a chaotic atmosphere and with improper and highly politicized editing. Despite its rich backing and allegedly high pay for its main journalists (Greenwald is said to receive between 250k and 1 million per year) the Intercept is begging for reader donations .

Yesterday's published story (with bylines of four(!) reporters) begins :

Russian military intelligence executed a cyberattack on at least one U.S. voting software supplier and sent spear-phishing emails to more than 100 local election officials just days before last November's presidential election, according to a highly classified intelligence report obtained by The Intercept.

The NSA "intelligence report" the Intercept publishes along the piece does NOT show that "Russian military intelligence executed a cyberattack ". The document speaks of "cyber espionage operations " - i.e someone looked and maybe copied data but did not manipulate anything. Espionage via computer networks is something every nation in this world (and various private entities) do all the time. It is simply the collection of information. It is different from a "cyberattack" like Stuxnet which was intended to create large damage,

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 6:32:53 AM | 1

First Deep State Arrest? http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/05/first-deep-state-arrest-government-contractor-busted-leaking-nsa-docs-to-the-intercept/

That girl's social media accounts is filled with neocon propaganda and anti-Trump posts. Intercept is really really stupid for spreading this deepstate pro-war desinformation.

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 6:40:53 AM | 2
Wikileaks twitter account has good comment on it. It is clear that The Intercept is a way to coopt hackers and leakers. She possibly would not have been arrested with Democrats in power. The New York Times and the Intercept have a campaign to leak to US sources so that whistleblowing is not treason.
never mind | Jun 6, 2017 6:53:25 AM | 3
I take it that there's not even the slightest or far reaching bit of evidence at all in the leaked documents that implicates Russia (or the US government) of any mischief.

So why even go out of your way to leak these supposedly worthless documents to the press in the first place? Who benefits?

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 7:01:37 AM | 4
never mind

Deep state benefits - analysis(?) is leaked which show as you say no proof, but it keeps the anti-russia propaganda going for another month or so - just as the anti-trump deep state and media wants. Sigh.

nobody | Jun 6, 2017 7:04:47 AM | 5
She looks like a dual citizen of the Rothschild colony in Palestine.
Mister Roboto | Jun 6, 2017 7:07:17 AM | 6
Thanks for this. Even before reading this account, I was inclined to think "fake news" because the Deep State is such a prolific and relentless generator of propaganda. And also, I think we're pretty much screwed regardless of who is in power. My only hope is that it all doesn't end up in mushroom-clouds.
Miller | Jun 6, 2017 7:10:45 AM | 7
This sort of activity wouldn't have helped Russian intelligence, but it might have been useful to US intelligence. DHS already got caught red handed.
opereta | Jun 6, 2017 7:16:59 AM | 8
It was obvious that The Intercept became a US Inteligence Industry pawn the minute it started to denounce Al Assad on 2016. It was too good to be true from the beginning. Snowden should say something about "his friends" Greenwald and Poitras !! As far as it is descrived in the above article, the R J Winner affaire could be just another Psy Op by the Langley People
Anon | Jun 6, 2017 7:20:36 AM | 9
Its interesting how Assange and Wikileaks support this deep-state leaker. Why?
somebody | Jun 6, 2017 7:40:07 AM | 10
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 7:20:36 AM | 9

Because one person's freedom is everybody's freedom or in a quotation "Freedom is always the freedom of the person that thinks differently from you".

Lea | Jun 6, 2017 7:49:35 AM | 13
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 7:20:36 AM | 9
Its interesting how Assange and Wikileaks support this deep-state leaker. Why?

Assange supports all leakers, regardless of what they leak or to whom. Any other stance would amount to shooting himself in the foot.

On another note, what is extraordinary is to see a Deep State leaker busted by the Deep State. How batty is that? I mean, she was only trying to help them against "big bad Russia", wasn't she? So?

falcemartello | Jun 6, 2017 7:51:05 AM | 14
Yes the intercept gave them self away when Greenwald wrote a piece denouncing the Syrian government and the SAA back in 2015. He occasionally has sane and progressive expressions like when he speaks against the fascist state of Israel. He gave himself away again on the propaganda outlet Democracy now. He was eluding to the fact of Russian collusion with the recent POTUS elections and the Flyn fiasco. Here again he gave himself away. He is bought and paid for by the elite like most journo's in our deluded western countries.

P.S if any of you get a chance try to catch the interview on RT where German journo, who is unfortunately dead, states categorically that CIA and his bosses would instruct him on what to write and how to write it.

although a fan of the intercept at first, i soured when they announced they were spying on their readership. never trust a billionaire. betrayal is the only route to billionaire status.

greenwald and poitras at the oscars turned my stomach. not a word about chelsea manning or any of the others ... greenwald and poitras were the 'stars'.

now, no matter this winner is a loser or no, they've betrayed another one of the people who've put them where they are. they're cannibals.

since i stopped reading the intercept i was unaware of their support for al-cia-duh and the jihadists in syria. that just stinks.

snowden cast his pearls before swine.

Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 7:55:51 AM | 16
Maybe someone at The Intercept thought this was an attempt by the NSA (not the "deep state, there isn't one") to burn them, so they toss the document back at the NSA to see what happens.

Why The Intercept? If you read most Clintonist blogs, you'll quickly realise that Greenwald is up there with Assange and Putin as satanic (Trumpist) agents, so an Internet-aware Clintonist sending documents to The Intercept or Wikileaks suggests some other purpose than simply leaking information adverse to Trump.

Most Clintonists have jumped on this NSA "document" as further solid proof of Putin's culpability which just happened to be "leaked" at about the same time a favourable interview with Putin was being broadcast on the MSM.

If Reality Leigh Winner goes to trial and receives serious prison time, then The Intercept was wrong, but until then I'll think she's a Clintonist useful idiot.

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:00:37 AM | 17
somebody / Lea

Actually Wikileaks/Assange have no idea if this info is even true. Who leaks this? Well obviously the same propagandists we heard past 6 months that want the world to think Russia and Trump won the election/the pathetic accusation that Russia somehow ruled the election to Trump. As far as we know the leaks could not only lack evidence but it could also be pure fake. So no, I dont see why Wikileaks and Assange would support this. But thats me.

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:05:00 AM | 18
Posted by: falcemartello | Jun 6, 2017 7:51:05 AM | 14

That would be Udo Ulfkotte. He used to work for FAZ. You have to take into account that he tried to live from writing books after FAZ and conspiracy theories do sell.

Of course everybody the US, Russia, Qatar, companies have a PR greyzone trying to influence public opinion.

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:08:44 AM | 19
Posted by: Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 7:55:51 AM | 16

Read the @intercept they even agreed with the NSA to redact the stuff. The solution is obvious but I don't hear anybody calling for it: Paper ballots. It is simple, works and is fast if you have a good counting system in place. Lots of countries still use it.

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:11:10 AM | 20
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:00:37 AM | 17

Accepting that leakers could be fake would destroy the business model. But no, if it was fake they would not go the extra effort to arrest a leaker who will be supplied good lawyers, I suppose.

jfl | Jun 6, 2017 8:13:28 AM | 21
Reality Winner charged leaking classified material

rod rosenstein ... Rosenstein and Mueller: the Regime Change Tag-Team , mike whitney has this guy's number, if you ask me.

Who "owns" the NSA secrets leaked by Edward Snowden to reporters Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras?

Greenwald and Poitras are now the only two people with full access to the complete cache of NSA files ... just Glenn and Laura at the for-profit journalism company created by the founder of eBay.

Whistleblowing has traditionally served the public interest. In this case, it is about to serve the interests of a billionaire starting a for-profit media business venture. This is truly unprecedented. Never before has such a vast trove of public secrets been sold wholesale to a single billionaire as the foundation of a for-profit company.

and who sold them? not edward snowden ... he gave them away ... to the two 'operators' who sold them to omidyar.

after death, devastation, and destruction outright ... deceit it the usofa's main growth industry. and hey, 'progressives' can do it too! and still huff and puff themselves up - among their temporary, transactional 'friends' anyway - with righteousness indignation.

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:19:24 AM | 22
somebody

Thats whats called desinformation or psyops., you already for example seems claim that this is true facts that have been leaked, but we dont know that. Or do you actually believe the whole Russia-Trump-hacking-claims we heard past months?

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:41:09 AM | 23
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:19:24 AM | 22

It is a document about what someone in the NSA believes , it is completely meaningless. Greenwald and Scahill are kind of distancing themselves from the article. The document is just enough to cause headlines that convince trusting people that Russia hacked the election. Arresting the leaker makes sure everybody heard about it. Who wrote it by the way

Matthew Cole, Richard Esposito, Sam Biddle, Ryan Grim

They need 4 people to publish a document and burn a source?

Uncle $cam | Jun 6, 2017 8:49:05 AM | 24
CIA Agents Caught Red Handed Trolling Alternative Media Sites http://humansarefree.com/2017/06/cia-agents-caught-red-handed-trolling.html I think we talked about this years ago, in regards to Israeli paid trolls, but we've gone so far into the Panopticon control grid, what difference does it make.

Carry on...

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:52:33 AM | 25
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:19:24 AM | 22

I assume Russia has a cyber capacity in its defense portfolio, like everybody else.

The most likely scenario is Hillary Clinton and Julian Assange having a very personal private war after the state department leaks. I also think, it is possible that Hillary Clinton and Putin had a very personal not so private war after Hillary announced that she would do everything to prevent a realignment of Post Soviet States. And employing Victoria Nuland to achieve just that.

What do politicians in the US think - that they can attack without anybody trying to hit back?

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 8:55:33 AM | 27
somebody

"... document about what someone in the NSA believes,..."

...which of course how psyops works. Because this leak will fuel more of the Trump/Russian conspiracies and hatred in the MSM.

Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 9:11:24 AM | 29

>>>>> Posted by: somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:08:44 AM | 19
Posted by: Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 7:55:51 AM | 16

Read the @intercept they even agreed with the NSA to redact the stuff.

Well that's a big fat F in Black Ops 101 for you.

The Intercept just returns the document to the NSA - end of.

The Intercept asks the NSA to review and redact the document - it keeps going. Returning the received document rather than a re-typed one might raise questions within the NSA but could be put down to operator error at The Intercept but re-typed documents would get The Intercept no further in working out what's actually happening.

I'm not sure if this is what is happening but the whole thing is weird.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 6, 2017 8:11:10 AM | 20

But no, if it was fake they would not go the extra effort to arrest a leaker who will be supplied good lawyers, I suppose.

Are you from one of those USG "perception management" projects? Well, if you are, American taxpayers should be pissed off if this is all the "best and brightest" can come up with. The USG IC has an annual budget of $65 billion so if this is a black op., they have more than enough money to be able to afford the arrest of the "leaker" and even pay for her to get decently lawyered up.

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 9:15:07 AM | 30
27) if so, there are unintended consequences

From the memory whole - wired

But that's not what's really important here. WikiLeaks and Assange say they have no responsibility for the content they leak, and that no one has evidence that the sources of the DNC leak are Russian. But these leaks and tweets damage WikiLeaks' credibility. If they're not scrutinizing their own leaks on the base level of their content, it's not hard to imagine that WikiLeaks could unwittingly become part of someone else's agenda (like, say, a Russian one). "If you are a legitimate leaker, why go with WikiLeaks? You go with The Intercept or the New York Times, like they did with the Panama Papers" says Nicholas Weaver, a computer scientist at UC Berkeley who studies the organization. "Wikileaks is a pastebin for spooks, and they're happy to be used that way."

All this effort to discredit Wikileaks - poof.

Kronos | Jun 6, 2017 9:22:06 AM | 32
One would think that all parties would be interested in this news. The Dems, of course, want to make Russian links. But doesn't Trump want to use this to prove his theory that the popular vote was wrong? Let's not turn this into a game where everyone interprets things based on ideology. The whole dang point is that someone was trying to infiltrate our voting system. Maybe they failed, maybe it was just a reconnaissance mission, but it happened. That is news.

Moon is obviously showing extreme bias. Instead of trying to figure out and analyze the implications he uses this as a way to score points. Points against the Intercept. Points against the Dems, and so on. How tiring.

SlapHappy | Jun 6, 2017 9:54:22 AM | 35
This whole episode smacks of a psy-op to me. If - and this is a big if - the Russians did hack into any voting systems, I'd be more willing to believe it was to collect evidence of malfeasance on the part of our own government than it would have been to manipulate the results themselves.

Important to note is that Putin just mentioned in his interview with Megyn Kelly that it doesn't matter who's president of the United States because no matter what, the policy remains the same. That's a pretty direct indictment of the integrity of US elections, so what better time to up the ante with respect to the obvious lies about Russian interference in our elections than right after Putin calls our elections Kabuki theater?

ben | Jun 6, 2017 10:15:11 AM | 38
More diversion folks. The real elephant in the room is the U$A electoral system. It's rotten to it's core. Regardless of ANY information coming from ANY source, the corporate overlords OWN the voting systems at the national level here in the U$A. SO, we here in the U$A, can believe whoever we want to, but, our votes, at least at national level, are meaningless.

P.S- Read around folks, but, watch what people do, not what the say.

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 10:34:10 AM | 40
jawbone

Well for one she is not a whistleblower, she is another anti-Trump neocon working for the deep state. She I believe leaked material just to attack Trump and Russia even more with info, as we have seen so many times now past months. She nor we as readers have any idea if there is any truth to the claim to start with. So why leak it? Well obviously, like past months, some groups in our society benefit from this greatly.

Bob Bows | Jun 6, 2017 10:46:15 AM | 41
The article even says that NO EVIDENCE has been presented: "While the document provides rare window into the NSA's understanding of the mechanics of Russian hacking, it does not show the underlying "raw" intelligence on which the analysis is based. A U.S. intelligence officer who declined to be identified cautioned against drawing too big a conclusion from the documentbecause a single analysis is not necessarily definitive."

The information is a lie, just like the original report from the Director of National Intelligence, as I detail here: http://coloradopublicbanking.blogspot.com/2017/01/us-intelligence-reports-fail.html

From The Hague | Jun 6, 2017 10:49:08 AM | 42
peter #39 that Trump has been utterly silent about Russia or Putin. Not one negative word.

Everybody not complying with "Russia/Putin is bad" must be paid or blackmailed. Silly.

Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 11:24:33 AM | 44
Posted by: Anon | Jun 6, 2017 10:34:10 AM | 40
she is another anti-Trump neocon working for the deep state

Three points:

1. She is not a neo-con, she's a neo-lib/liberal interventionist/R2P liberal/Clintonist. There is a big difference between neo-cons and neo-libs/liberal interventionists/R2P liberals/Clintonists. The neo-cons do it because they can, the latter, who are far more dangerous, do it "for the greater good" although they rarely ask the people who it's being done for what they think and they have a far greater degree of "religious"certainty about what they're doing.
To paraphrase Putin in his recent interview, "why would he interfere in American elections as he gets the same foreign policy crap regardless of which side wins?"

2. The neo-cons lost big time in Iraq and as a result have little real power in Washington beyond being disruptive.

3. There is no deep state in the United States now because it's totally visible, and since both the neo-cons and the neo-libs/liberal interventionists/R2P liberals/Clintonists have the same objective there is no need for secrecy or conspiracies. If anyone needs to revive the "deep state" it's the Trumpists.

All these conspiracy theories are a waste of time and energy because there is so much real dangerous crap going on that needs to be attended to first.

William Rood | Jun 6, 2017 11:31:31 AM | 45
I haven't trusted The Intercept since they ran their hit piece on Tulsi Gabbard.
financial matters | Jun 6, 2017 11:37:29 AM | 46
Ghostship. True enough. But knowing it is still different from effectively dealing with it. The elite/CIA controlled mass media still has a lot of power to persuade people as do the corporations that finance political elections. As well as the people who make money from arms sales. These people who may be loosely referred to as 'deep state' don't want to give up any of that power/money.
From The Hague | Jun 6, 2017 11:43:20 AM | 47
#46
"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Foreign_Policy/US_ForeignPolicy.html
SlapHappy | Jun 6, 2017 11:46:22 AM | 48
Assuming the neocons and neolibs represent different interests is the same as assuming the democrats and republicans represent different masters. Divide and conquer is the name of the game, and until we can come together and agree on who the real enemy is, they'll continue eating our lunch with impunity.
Pnyx | Jun 6, 2017 11:57:04 AM | 49
Thanks for the very valuable information. I wonder what Snowdon is thinking and maybe doing about The Intercept. Being him I would be fourious.
Anon | Jun 6, 2017 11:57:32 AM | 50
ghostship

She follows a neocon agenda (war against afghanistan, war against Syria, hatered against Russia, hatred against foreign policy that Trump have i.e), she works for the deep state, she leak deep state material to smear her "enemies".

Who are those who spread this bs to the MSM about Trump and Russia constantly for past months? Where does it come from if not from the deep state groups?

NemesisCalling | Jun 6, 2017 12:38:46 PM | 52
@24 uncle $cam

This is easy to tell but difficult to snuff out in the end. Once Hillary and co. started railing against paid Kremlin-trolls on alt-right and various forum sites, you knew that it was something that they had been doing for quite sometime and, indeed, had been losing the battle. At that point, it was best to throw up their hands and concoct the victim-story, even though we TPTB probably pioneered the tactics (color revolutions, ngos, etc.).

Perhaps there were Kremlin agents on our boards. Perhaps there are some here. But truth, or a slightly biased truth, still stands in their corner, so I refuse to complain about Russia agents. The CIA OTOH. They can GTFO.

james | Jun 6, 2017 12:39:01 PM | 53
thanks b..

i used to like greenwald long before his time at the intercept... the intercept smelt funny right from the beginning.. i haven't followed it, in spite of having enjoyed reading greenwald when he was more independent..

this whole story stinks to high heaven.. something is weird about the whole thing.. can't put my finger on it.. seems like more bs basically.. the usa is bonkers at this point..

@8 opereta... i see it similar to you..

@43 uncle scam... some of those folks are still around, but more of them are not..

hopehely | Jun 6, 2017 12:48:49 PM | 54
How on Earth do these kids (Snowden, Winner, etc) manage to get that kind of jobs?
crone | Jun 6, 2017 12:52:30 PM | 55
@54 2 yrs of college, a couple of years in 'the field' (Air Force in this case)

Pointman | Jun 6, 2017 1:13:54 PM | 57
As you say, appalling tradecraft by both the leaker and the recipient. I would have thought even a cursory security check before giving her any security clearance would have unearthed her extreme views on social media.

Some general thoughts on the subject of leaks from the Trump administration -

https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2017/06/02/leaks/

Pointman

Brooklin Bridge | Jun 6, 2017 1:17:51 PM | 58
Excellent article. A warning to heed and I hope it gets out far and wide. Omidyar being behind the Intercept has always been an iffy proposition at best, and it has never sat well that Greenwald is apparently satisfied with such an arrangement.
Copeland | Jun 6, 2017 1:20:02 PM | 59
What a circus of distraction that grabs for public attention; its chief element is distraction,-- and its goal is distraction. In the end, Trump will probably go farther to accommodate the deep state, since what it aims to destroy is any chance for improvement of relations with Russia. This a PSYOPS extravaganza. The moronic level of political debate is not going to improve with the introduction of Reality Winner ( whose name sounds a bit silly, in this context).

The confirmed partisans will wolf down such farce without even tasting it. These absurd pratfalls will stop abruptly when the risk to our survival becomes obvious; but something on the order of a miracle would need to happen soon, to avert disaster. Trump's base will loudly congratulate him, whatever concessions he makes to survive politically; and the rationally unmoored Dems will sign on to any confidence game if it gets the results they are after.

Certainly, a closer observation of the details can help. Thanks to the author of this article, our host, and those who have commented. The alternative is for life to become a work of fiction.

WGary | Jun 6, 2017 1:44:48 PM | 60
My guess is "Reality Winner" is actually very bright, experienced and goes by another name.

NemesisCalling | Jun 6, 2017 2:03:54 PM | 62
b,

Outstanding reporting, b. I saw a report on the microlending "phenomenon" in India on PBS a long time ago. It was heralded then. I'll have to dive into your link to survey the damage. Thx again.

h | Jun 6, 2017 2:06:17 PM | 63
Hey b, John Kiriakou chimed in saying "@theintercept should be ashamed of itself. Matthew Cole burns yet another source. It makes your entire organization untrustworthy"

And you just know Mark Ames will have a piece up bashing Omidyar, Greenwald and Scahill. Speaking of Scahill, other than a weekly podcast, what exactly does he do for the Intercept?

WorldBLee | Jun 6, 2017 2:06:58 PM | 64
Greenwald is a self-serving hack and the Intercept functions alongside outlets like DemocracyNow! to provide a Democrat-friendly perspective on the world to people who think they are very "progressive". They will never challenge the fundamental precepts of US imperialism and the oligarchic powers behind it, or truly rock the boat.
4mas | Jun 6, 2017 2:15:02 PM | 65
There's a chance they got played. As noted, the documents don't actual show evidence of actual interference with voting system beyond data gathering. But now we have a leaker who's social media bills her as part of the resistance. And in this environment, how are the optics going to look like prosecuting someone who is being passed off as having leaked evidence of malfeasance? I think they rushed too quickly to publish.
BilboBaggeshott | Jun 6, 2017 2:28:40 PM | 66
Nice to see so many finally coming to the realisation that Greenwald, Poitras and the Intercept are disinfo operatives.... Waiting for the rest of you to begin questioning The Snowjob too.
jfl | Jun 6, 2017 2:34:09 PM | 67
pence smells blood in the water ... Russia, Iran and terrorism are top global threats - Pence
"From the Russian attempts to redraw international borders by force, to Iran destabilizing the Middle East, and to the global threat of terrorism, which affects people everywhere. It seems that the world has become much more dangerous today than ever since the fall of communism, about a quarter of a century ago,"- he said at a meeting of vice-president.

... pence is running for president ... in 2017?

Piotr Berman | Jun 6, 2017 2:37:15 PM | 68
Actually, it is a good question how Winner got the access to the file. "Top Secret" is actually a low level of secrecy, without specific restriction who "needs to know" it. Practical problem for the wanna be leaker is to find "a needle in the haystack". Probably the chain of folders had self-explanatory names, which is like posting in on the billboard for all and sundry working for NSA. That in itself can be "leaking with a borrowed hand".

The content does not seem to be secret in the sense of revealing "sources and methods", just a scrubbed analysis with conclusions. A major part of the mission of intelligence agency to to careful draw conclusions from the gathered data so they are useful to the decision makers: access to information allows to engage in disinformation. But what to do with the obsolete analysis, prepared for the PDM, previous decision maker? Post it on a billboard, if you still like PDM.

Alternatively, the document was prepared in such a way that it was actually politically harmless but it could snare the leaker who would be triumphantly and publicly "executed". That can improve the discipline in the shop.

Poor girl. But those Intercept people, why they did not at least re-type the document before showing it to anyone?

blues | Jun 6, 2017 2:41:19 PM | 69
=>> Ghostship | Jun 6, 2017 11:24:33 AM | 44

This is silly nonsense. There is no difference at all between the neocons and the neolibs (the neolords). They come from exactly the same place and believe in exactly the same thing. Specifically, they are atychiphobs; they cannot endure any form of failure. So they always must attach themselves to whatever they perceive as the winning side. And ultimately rule the rest of the losing world. For them that's all there is; Hillary is an example, and most rich individuals also. They would absolutely prefer death to loserdom. So of course they have no concerns at all about the fate of the losers. They are all the same.

And speaking of psyops and propaganda, the Deep State (of course there is a deep state (the neolords) whom common selves cannot comprehend) is now in the business of producing psyoperative YouTube videos. See if you can spot the subliminal propaganda in this one (hint -- it is not at all about how Russians perceive Americans):

RUSSIAN MILLENNIALS SPEAK OPENLY ABOUT AMERICA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFklhWu3d3E

From The Hague | Jun 6, 2017 2:57:46 PM | 71
Posted by: BilboBaggeshott | Jun 6, 2017 2:28:40 PM | 66

How to Identify a CIA Limited Hangout Operation http://tarpley.net/2013/06/19/how-to-identify-a-cia-limited-hangout-operation/

Peter AU | Jun 6, 2017 3:02:36 PM | 72
Sounds like a con job from start to finish. Along the lines of bellingcat, SOHR ect. Just another method of disseminating propaganda.
Anon | Jun 6, 2017 3:04:42 PM | 73
hophely:

"How on Earth do these kids ( Winner) manage to get that kind of jobs?"

Exactly! I thought you had to be very special, bright and so on to get this kind of jobs here we have a 25 year old girl, that is named...Reality Winner and she has social media where she posts alot of selfies of herself and have a twitter feed like high school student. She seems quite dorky to me. That she has already been in and out of the air force is even more bizarre. This is the kind of morons ruling this world.

anon | Jun 6, 2017 3:10:44 PM | 74
The Intercept article is as inept as the NSA document! it's mostly a cartoon, and things like guessing corporate emails are hardly espionage - they are normal ways of figuring out how to contact people in the professional world, NOT a security threat. Phishing them ought to be illegal, but clearly the FBI doesn't give a crap until it happens to Clinton's campaign chair. At least it is SO common that normal people KNOW not to fall for it. what a bunch of drivel! If the NSA had any actual intelligence that the origin of the emails was Russia, you would think that might be part of the explanation, but the cartoon only says "probably within"...

Then the Intercept spends pages (and pages) arguing for more $$ for the NSA (!) and to centralize control of US elections to the federal level where all this 'insecurity' can be properly controlled by responsible people (like the NSA, or the POTUS).

Topping that off was Amy Goodman showing an interview with a Clinton mouthpiece trumpeting propaganda that this whole "Russian" scheme is a way to get contact info of registered voters to aim "fake news" at them....... anybody here who is a registered voter knows that the minute you sign up you are permanently on the list for daily piles of glossy lies from PACS and nightly phone surveys about what crafted message would work 'if the election were held today'. Where I live, the Dems have so much money that they poll the crap out of us during city-level campaigns. (and after the election they can't be bothered with what their voters care about.)

this whole thing is such a circus! and yes, the NSA has access to far more info than these stupid documents allude to, not to mention that the US has got to have some massive access to Russian data.

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 3:16:17 PM | 75
Glenn Greenwald is a puppet http://smoloko.com/ The Intercept consistently strongly campaigned for globalist Macron by repeatedly disparaging Le Pen as "Holocaust denier", see https://theintercept.com/2017/04/27/le-pen-promotes-holocaust-denier-plans-ban-kosher-butchers-yarmulkes/. Glenn Greenwald is a gay Jew https://twitter.com/FullGoy
anon | Jun 6, 2017 3:20:27 PM | 76
I should add: If Putin were directly responsible for hacking anything, Clinton should kiss Putin's who-cares-what for waiting until AFTER the primaries. She got to be part of the final coin-toss.

really, why is this NSA document even considered whistle-blowing?

PavewayIV | Jun 6, 2017 3:37:14 PM | 77
People - please stop the insanity.

Greenwald/Intercept?

The firewall set up by (or at least 'persuaded' by) the U.S. intelligence to toss out a few useless Snowden scraps to the peons? Why would the Intercept NOT report report this to their intel masters? Does anyone here really think 1) the Intercept has NOT been compromised since day one, 2) everybody and and everything at the Intercept is NOT closely monitored by the intel community? They probably have a department just for the Intercept. So whether the Intercept actually ratted out Winner is irrelevant - the NSA probably knows what flavor of coffee the mail guy at the Intercept was holding when he picked up the previously examined mail. The only way any Top Secret document is making its way to the Intercept is if the NSA or FBI created and mailed the document themselves. And if the alleged journalist did not report receipt of the document to the FBI, then THEY would face jail time if the FBI found it during a raid.

How did Winner come about this information?

Setting aside the antics of the Intercept, let's consider how preposterous this story is at face value. She's basically a translator for a few Middle Eastern languages. So she's reading email or web sites or listening to phone calls and doing her translating thing. It's not like she's a high-level analyst preparing briefings for the National Intelligence director - she's a damn low-level translator (no offense to NSA translators out there).

Why on earth would someone in that position have ANY Top Secret memos on Russian hackers or the election. Do people really think there is (at her workplace) a network-accessible folder labeled 'Top Secret' that anyone with a Top Secret clearance can browse through? No - that's not how it works. Does anyone think they have a 'Top Secret' mailing list to distribute memos? Nope. In fact, can ANYONE give me the least plausible reason why some nobody Arabic-language translator would ever even be able to SEE a Top Secret memo regarding a subject she has absolutely no involvement with?

Computers at Intel Agencies

If Winner DID manage to stumble upon a Top Secret memo on her work network unrelated to her job, then her supervisor would have known it within minutes. Everything anybody does is constantly monitored and logged, right down to the keystroke. SHE would know that. In fact, she would be fired for not reporting this impossible access to top secret information immediately. She would be further punished for even having the document linger on her screen for more than a second or two. There's a reason they put TOP SECRET at the very top of every page. Classified documents also have their own security/surveillance/monitoring mechanisms. The document itself (or the document management system) knows or is told who is allowed to read it or even see that it exists. It would record her access, even if all the other security and monitoring software the agency had failed completely. So you get the idea. Even if she saw this document (unlikely) and did NOT report the inappropriate access, she would eventually be frog-walked out of the building before the end of the day.

Printing

I won't belabor the point, but everything from all the security, monitoring and logging items above apply moreso for printing anything. Top Secret documents (and their networks) do not allow you to print them at all, and certainly not on some random office printer. Presuming she did the impossible and get a Top Secret document printed out (which would all be logged), how did she get it out of her controlled-access area and the building itself? Hide it in her purse? Tell the guard, "I'm taking this folder of top secret stuff home to work on, but it's OK - I have a top secret clearance..."

All modern printers and copy machines have an invisible watermark that identifies the time/date you printed a page and the serial number of the machine. If she copied it somewhere, then they copy can be traced to a certain machine and date/time. She's busted either way if the feds got their hands on it, and SHE KNOWS THAT.

Impossible Conclusion

Now given all the above and her knowledge of how all that works, does anyone think she's STILL going to naively print out and mail a hard copy of Top Secret information to a known compromised, well-monitored news site... because she doesn't like Trump??

Sorry - but unless someone can prove she has an extra chromosome or two, I have to believe this is a charade. She won't go to jail because she's in on it with the NSA and it's not a real Top Secret document anyway. NO intelligence agency will ever verify or deny something you show them is either legitimate or Top Secret, so even that part is wrong. If you call them to ask about a document you have, they will politely put you on hold so they can dispatch some DHS thugs to kick in your door and retrieve said document - without telling you anything either way.

Why would she do this then? Well, if she knew she wasn't really going to be tried to go to prison and the NSA is 'in' on it, then I'm sure there's a large check waiting for her somewhere. How much do you think it would take to buy out a translator from her crappy .gov job? Plus, she gets to stick it to Trump and those evil Russians. It's a win-win!

Maybe I'm too cynical nowadays, but this whole thing is preposterous beyond belief. Am I the only one that thinks this whole thing stinks to high heaven? I'm amazed the bar is so low for these fabrications.

Merlin2 | Jun 6, 2017 3:47:26 PM | 78
For james #53 and all who want to be amused: it's all so poetic!

https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/6fkoe1/reality_winner_reality_for_winners/

I tend to agree with the hint, hint - #RealityWinner is an obvious PsyOp. Her employer probably had a deal for her - agree to be "used", play the part in a little prosecution game we'll have going, make sure you leak to Cook - and don't worry, you'll be well rewarded in the end.

Why her? the name, of course - sends a nice message. And her youth - get a little sympathy going. from a gullible public (not any of us though).

Rusty Pipes | Jun 6, 2017 4:09:32 PM | 80
The timing of this leak and the choice of media outlet is very convenient for the Establishment Dems/Deep State Russia investigation. Leaking to the Intercept, which has credibility in the alternative media, would be a convenient way to get the story covered in the MSM and leftist media. It certainly helps to distract Berners from the Seth Rich story. Some interns at the Intercept did a sloppy job checking up on their source.
the pair | Jun 6, 2017 4:14:02 PM | 81
thank you for this. i left a comment on that article yesterday about how dumb the technical aspects were and apparently you noticed as well (i also mentioned stuxnet as an example of what an effective and professional attack would actually look like). the thought that a macro in a word file (who lets those run by default anyway?) could pivot into some elaborate firmware/hardware exploit is just dumb. even the article mentions that machines and procedures vary from state to state and even city to city. seems like a lot of work to put into changing votes for a few thousand people.

as i also mentioned: hillary won durham by a WIDE margin (almost 100k votes). seems like any "hacking" worked to her advantage, not trump's.

i've been reading douglas valentine's book on the phoenix program and other CIA criminality https://www.amazon.com/CIA-Organized-Crime-Illegal-Operations/dp/0997287012

and he makes a lot of the points you do here regarding the intercept. as much as i respect greenwald, he and the other top tier hires don't need that site. they've got enough leverage to start their own site or even just stick to facebook and/or twitter and then "third party" out to big sites. this would give them exposure without tying them down to one billionaire with his own agendas and biases.

glenn used to have some oddly toxic opinions (anti-chavez whining and supposed initial support for the iraq war) and came around. he's not a dummy. i also doubt he has any malevolent intentions given his charitable work in brazil and what seems like genuine concern for "the law" and privacy and etc.

the documents were trusted to him and a few others. there was a reason for that. every non-journalist (and i include many intercept writers in that group) since is just a parasite using him and the documents as a host. time to swat them away and be truly indie. (not holding my breath).

side note: "reality winner"? wow. when i first saw the headlines i thought she was a former contestant on "big brother" or something. we'll see how much vocal support she gets from the democrats. again - not holding breath.

stumpy | Jun 6, 2017 4:34:04 PM | 83
It looks like a real half-arsed psyops -- here is the "Russia did it" smoking gun we've all been waiting for and it gets sorta rolled out but not trumpeted hysterically. Why the Intercept? Why not the NYtimes or wapo? Just like the dossier a few months ago, generated some smoke but in the end its a weak petard. Did Sessions tamp it down?
Anonymous Hippopotamus | Jun 6, 2017 4:38:46 PM | 84
Coincidence that this just happened? http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/news/michael-moore-launches-trumpileaks-website-calls-whistleblowers-1010640
Sibel Edmonds | Jun 6, 2017 4:51:45 PM | 85
Thank you 'Moon of Alabama' for publishing this solid piece and warning future whistleblowers. Kudos to you!

Regards, Sibel Edmonds (FBI Whistleblower; Founder & Editor of Newsbud)

somebody | Jun 6, 2017 5:03:06 PM | 86
Posted by: Anonymous Hippopotamus | Jun 6, 2017 4:38:46 PM | 84

No, wikileaks kind of recommends it.

@wikileaks 24

Michael Moore's #Trumpileaks is not secure enough to protect sources with classified information but it is better than many newspapers.

karlof1 | Jun 6, 2017 5:12:51 PM | 87
Paveway IV @77--

It's becoming more difficult daily to find something that doesn't stink. I see it as an attempt to further bury the censored NBC interview with Putin where he explained several hard truths, one of which I alluded to yesterday. Compare vid here, http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/06/nbc-edited-out-putins-hard-truths-heres.html with uncensored one here, which includes transcript, http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/54688

I strongly urge bar patrons to read transcript or watch uncensored vid and cease wasting time on all the related "nonsense."

blues | Jun 6, 2017 5:25:10 PM | 88
=>> Sibel Edmonds | Jun 6, 2017 4:51:45 PM | 85

No comment.

Corbett & Edmonds Call Out Nauseating Russia Worship in Alt Media
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijdMfUdLfTw

Anon | Jun 6, 2017 5:32:25 PM | 89
blues 88

Like watching desperate housewife talking about foreign policy, but I guess one shouldnt be surprised about her views coming being a fmr. FBI agent.

james | Jun 6, 2017 5:39:47 PM | 90
@77 paveway... thanks.. you are preaching to the choir here.. none of the story adds up, but the intercept is one bs outfit plain and simple..

@78/79 merlin.. thanks.. we see it much the same!

this ''russia did it memo'' is so friggin' boring... the usa has lost it's creative imagination if it ever had one to begin with... hollywood is over and one with.. give it up hollywash..

ruralito | Jun 6, 2017 5:40:23 PM | 91
@88, thanks. My estimation of C & E just took a big hit.

aaaa | Jun 6, 2017 5:50:10 PM | 92
@82 I remember reading that some crazy number, like 6 million people have security clearances. That's a lot of people that signed up to keep quiet. I guess a lot of it relates to basic military stuff, or controlled technology like aircraft parts or whatever.

Marym | Jun 6, 2017 6:00:49 PM | 93
PavewayIV @ 77

Farsi, it's Afghan version Dari, and Pashto are Indo-European > Indo-Iranian, languages, not Arabic languages, though they use the Arabic script.

brian | Jun 6, 2017 6:05:16 PM | 94
who are these Intercept guys? the billionaire seems to hire anyone

'Matthew Cole, Richard Esposito, Sam Biddle, Ryan Grim'

DC | Jun 6, 2017 6:15:00 PM | 95
She speaks Farsi and Pashto, I bet she's CIA who's been promised a lot of $$$ after she serves a short prison term. It's my guess that what she provided to The Intercept was given to her after it was manufactured or "doctored". The info published by The Intercept should be considered as suspicious.

aaaa | Jun 6, 2017 6:20:45 PM | 96
@94 there was some recent expose on the intercept that was quite damning, but I can't remember the content

PavewayIV | Jun 6, 2017 6:35:50 PM | 97
Marym@93 - Thanks. I hesitated to just say 'Iranian' because that didn't seem quite right, but 'Arabic' is obviously wrong. Hey, I'm American. I couldn't even tell you where Farsiland or Pastonia are on a map. I think... somewhere by Italy? No, wait...

dh | Jun 6, 2017 6:48:22 PM | 98
@95 Sounds right. She won't get the full Chelsea Manning treatment. Just a naive patriotic young American girl who did the right thing. Obviously she was tricked into using that copier. Couple of months and she''ll get a job at Fox.
@98 ....which she will turn down for a better offer at CNN.

Posted by: dh | Jun 6, 2017 6:55:18 PM | 99

@98 ....which she will turn down for a better offer at CNN.

Posted by: dh | Jun 6, 2017 6:55:18 PM | 99

JerseyJeffersonian | Jun 6, 2017 7:12:49 PM | 100
Remember when Greenwald's Brazilian boyfriend was being held by the authorities and accused of smuggling information from Snowden? Then he got released. Hmm.

Wonder if there was some sort of agreement to the effect that if Greenwald played ball, possible prosecution against said boyfriend would be held in abeyance. This is a tactic employed by government lawyers in some cases when they want something. Like a slow-walking of releases from Snowden's revelations, for instance. And maybe some other dirty business when wanted by the powers that be, like this "leak" that the NSA thought something could be true , but with the leak not containing any proof or any supporting raw intelligence.

Holding a sword over the head of the boyfriend might be just the ticket. And couple that with speculation that Snowden's documents contained revelations about Greenwald's boss, Pierre Omidyar. Maybe an offer that Greenwald and company could not refuse.

Speculation on my part, of course. But not the first time that such tactics have been deployed.

[Jun 04, 2017] More felonies committed by the American Espionage Spies (leakers)

There is a special term for those folk who are mainly involved in justified their own existence: "national security parasites". Their existence does increase chances of accidental war with Russia or China because want to defend not the USA, but their lucrative positions and streams of income. that requires certain level of hostilities to be maintained.
Let's assume that Russians are the US enemies. If so, them recent leaks sound like betrayal of Bretchey Part efforts to decode enigma during WWII. Some damned traitors in Washington have just told the Russians that their top secret communications have been cracked. Its a bit like the BBC broadcasting that German enigma machine/ code has been cracked. If true, huge advantage, considerable amount of money and efforts of NSA (as well taxpayers money) just disappeared in thin air. And today's electronic cipher gear is much more sophisticated than in the era of Enigma and therefore the loss is so much greater that hypethetical BBC brodcast.
Notable quotes:
"... What do you think? Would their initials be JB, JC and AS? What do you think? Do you think these "Russian government officials" were discussing such matters on unencrypted, open circuits? No? Well, if these intercepts and decrypts were of classified, secret Russian communications traffic, then the leaker spies have disclosed SCI COMINT. But I suppose they are above the law. " The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence." ..."
"... That means that the US spies were above the working level in the US IC. I will say nothing of the role played by CNN in this betrayal of the United States. ..."
"... By long standing legal precedent journalistic projects are immune from prosecution for disclosing government secrets, but I am filled with a great contempt for them. Are the principal spies acting alone? I would think not. The government has many seditionists within it. ..."
"... That JC guy just made quite interesting remarks in an NBC interview. "If you put that in context with everything else we knew the Jews were doing and just the historical practices of the Jews, who typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Jewish technique." Isn't that some deeply fascist stuff to say? ..."
"... b, JC claims "Russia is not our friend." Could he really be so naive as to believe that nations have friends? One could argue more damage has been done to US security by some of our "friends" than our "enemies"- for example, its unclear how NK has hurt US security to date. ..."
"... First of all, Kushner supposedly "ASKED" to do this, not actually "DID" this. Would "ASKING" to do this be just as treasonous an act as if he had "DONE" this? If so, that brings me to . . . Second of all, the Overt Act which must be witnessed by 2 people at the same time . . . must be in direct assistance to an overt enemy declared to be in a State of War against America. Did this Overt Act, if indeed it was one, seek to render assistance to an Overt Enemy in a State of War against America? No. Because Russia is not an Overt Enemy in any Declared State of War. ..."
"... Now . . . is Russia a "covert enemy"? Or maybe just a "covert adversary"? Maybe so. In which case, broadcasting to the world including most of all to Russia itself that we can decrypt their most sensitive strongestly-encrypted communications destroys our ability to do that decrypting. And THAT is a highly anti-American thing to have done. ..."
"... Sedition is the right word. We are witnessing the overthrow of POTUS by bunch treacherous bastards. Short of a civil war, is there legal/political way to stop these guys? ..."
"... Sedition isn't any more correct than the foolish talk of treason. Those screaming the loudest about Trump's supposed treason are seeking to used the existing structures of government and the Constitution to oust a sitting president and those around him. They are not trying to overthrow or destroy the government. ..."
"... Their substance is nothing, less than nothing. For foreign governments to wish to find ways to influence an American Administration s completely normal. Do you not think our NATO allies have the same conversations as well as our lovely Israeli friends. What do you think ambassadors do for a living? They advise on how to affect hat? As or Kushner's commo proposal, it was a stupid idea but hardly treasonous. you have to remember that the Trump people were not yet the US government. pl ..."
"... worth noting. jfk opened a back channel to Khrushchev after he was elected and before he was sworn in as president ..."
"... If the Russians really wanted to troll us, members of their embassy staff could hand out cookies to protesters in DC. ..."
"... But the Trump transition was unique in its unwillingness to use the government's communications lines and briefing material for its dealings with many foreign governments, partly because of concern that Obama administration officials might be monitoring the calls.... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/us/politics/jared-kushner-russia-investigation.html?_r=0 ..."
"... So the Trump people figured out what any sentient being has known from the very beginning, that the crooked Obama team and their allies in the IC were sweeping up all their communications to derail their political agenda which involved normalizing relations with Russia. ..."
"... Intel has confirmed a Remote Elevation of Privilege bug (CVE-2017-5689) in its Management Technology, on 1 May 2017.[12] Every Intel platform with either Intel Standard Manageability, Active Management Technology, or Small Business Technology, from Nehalem in 2008 to Kaby Lake in 2017 has a remotely exploitable security hole in the IME (Intel Management Engine) ..."
"... Many never-Trumpers in both parties now regard the security bureaucracy as their last, best hope. Following the Washington Post's disclosure on December 9 that the CIA believed Russia had intervened in the election to help Trump, the agency overnight became the great darling of many Trump critics. ..."
"... Glennon thinks Trump may surprise those who "blithely assume that the security bureaucracy will fight him to the death". As he says "it has never faced the raw hostility of an all out frontal assault from the White House." Indeed his greater concern is that should Trump go all in to quell this rebellion, "splintered and demoralised factions within the bureaucracy could actually support - not oppose - many potential Trump initiatives, such as stepped-up drone strikes, cyber attacks, covert action, immigration bands, and mass surveillance." From where things stand right now, that seems like a good problem to have. ..."
May 30, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com

" (CNN) Russian government officials discussed having potentially "derogatory" information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and some of his top aides in conversations intercepted by US intelligence during the 2016 election, according to two former intelligence officials and a congressional source.

One source described the information as financial in nature and said the discussion centered on whether the Russians had leverage over Trump's inner circle. The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence that Russians believed "they had the ability to influence the administration through the derogatory information."" CNN (Dana Bash reporting)

----------------

"... two former intelligence officials and a congressional source."

What do you think? Would their initials be JB, JC and AS? What do you think? Do you think these "Russian government officials" were discussing such matters on unencrypted, open circuits? No? Well, if these intercepts and decrypts were of classified, secret Russian communications traffic, then the leaker spies have disclosed SCI COMINT. But I suppose they are above the law. " The source said the intercepted communications suggested to US intelligence."

That means that the US spies were above the working level in the US IC. I will say nothing of the role played by CNN in this betrayal of the United States.

By long standing legal precedent journalistic projects are immune from prosecution for disclosing government secrets, but I am filled with a great contempt for them. Are the principal spies acting alone? I would think not. The government has many seditionists within it.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/30/politics/russians-trump-campaign-information/

b , 30 May 2017 at 03:26 PM
That JC guy just made quite interesting remarks in an NBC interview. "If you put that in context with everything else we knew the Jews were doing and just the historical practices of the Jews, who typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Jewish technique." Isn't that some deeply fascist stuff to say?

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/james-clapper-trump-russia-ties-my-dashboard-warning-light-was-n765601

james - b ... , 30 May 2017 at 04:30 PM
yeah, except he said 'Russians' not 'Jews' so he is following the script handed these bozos to the letter religiously..
ISL - b ... , 30 May 2017 at 06:21 PM
b, JC claims "Russia is not our friend." Could he really be so naive as to believe that nations have friends? One could argue more damage has been done to US security by some of our "friends" than our "enemies"- for example, its unclear how NK has hurt US security to date.
Fluesterwitz - b ... , 31 May 2017 at 10:00 AM
That will teach me to read the comments before going to the poisoned source. You had me there. I suppose as 'Russians' really means 'Commies' anyway, it's not really that bad. /s
james , 30 May 2017 at 03:36 PM
these bozos need to focus on how they have been bought and paid for by israel and saudi arabia.. russia is like some fly on the side of an elephant.. no one is talking about the elephant for good reason... they are a bunch of liars and sycophants either way..
bks , 30 May 2017 at 03:39 PM
There comes a time when the public should be informed. POTUS committing treason is one of those times.
Jack - bks ... , 30 May 2017 at 04:25 PM
Clearly you are a political partisan. And in your hatred of Trump quite willing to sell out the US.

The only evidence of treason is by two former intelligence officials and a congressional source, who have leaked the ability of the US to decrypt secure communication of the Russians. Maybe they'll get the noose if such crimes are ever prosecuted.

iowa steve - , 30 May 2017 at 06:18 PM
Why do we assume the "leaked information" is true and not something entirely made up by the "sources" and handed to the always credulous media?
Jack - , 31 May 2017 at 09:30 PM
If it is all made up, then what would you call propagating false information by high national intelligence officials in collusion with national media to take down a legitimate POTUS?
Ghostship - , 30 May 2017 at 11:46 PM
It's far more likely that they're just making this stuff up. Are they ever going to be required to repeat this stuff under oath or even produce evidence of their claims? I very much doubt it.
Fred - bks ... , 31 May 2017 at 12:59 PM
Bks,

Obama is now an ex-president. Better late than never though.

turcopolier , 30 May 2017 at 04:00 PM
bks

You have no evidence whatever of any treasonous behavior on Trump's part. This is mere slander. You are an obvious political troll. pl

Matthew - turcopolier ... , 31 May 2017 at 09:30 AM
Col: The slander stems from the belief that the Establishment makes legitimate policy, and the Elected President must ask their permission. To me, this attitude is a wholesale rejection of our constitutional system.
Freudenschade , 30 May 2017 at 04:20 PM
Col.,

"ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

We know your opinion of the leakers, but what about their substance?

jonst - , 31 May 2017 at 06:14 AM
Substantively, this (the entire 'Russian Affair, or, employing the mating call of the asshole, RussiaGate, seems like mush, seasoned and spooned to the American Public with a whole lotta adjectives (like the guy above, "treasonous" and such), and sold as steak.
bks , 30 May 2017 at 04:21 PM
Excommunicate me if you must, but Kushner asking to use encrypted communications from the Russian embassy is the very definition of treason.
sid_finster - bks ... , 30 May 2017 at 05:39 PM
Explain how. Do you even know what treason is?
different clue - bks ... , 30 May 2017 at 06:35 PM
bks,

First of all, Kushner supposedly "ASKED" to do this, not actually "DID" this. Would "ASKING" to do this be just as treasonous an act as if he had "DONE" this? If so, that brings me to . . . Second of all, the Overt Act which must be witnessed by 2 people at the same time . . . must be in direct assistance to an overt enemy declared to be in a State of War against America. Did this Overt Act, if indeed it was one, seek to render assistance to an Overt Enemy in a State of War against America? No. Because Russia is not an Overt Enemy in any Declared State of War.

Now . . . is Russia a "covert enemy"? Or maybe just a "covert adversary"? Maybe so. In which case, broadcasting to the world including most of all to Russia itself that we can decrypt their most sensitive strongestly-encrypted communications destroys our ability to do that decrypting. And THAT is a highly anti-American thing to have done.

MRW - bks ... , 31 May 2017 at 06:13 AM
Kushner asking to use encrypted communications from the Russian embassy is the very definition of treason.

Treason? You're a nutcase.

lucopter , 30 May 2017 at 04:37 PM
Sedition is the right word. We are witnessing the overthrow of POTUS by bunch treacherous bastards. Short of a civil war, is there legal/political way to stop these guys? Would it help if Trump calls for a million man march in DC?
The Twisted Genius - , 30 May 2017 at 08:09 PM
lucopter,

Sedition isn't any more correct than the foolish talk of treason. Those screaming the loudest about Trump's supposed treason are seeking to used the existing structures of government and the Constitution to oust a sitting president and those around him. They are not trying to overthrow or destroy the government.

Trump certainly could call for a million man march, but he better be certain he could generate crowds at least as big as the women's march. Anything less would backfire.

We may see something big happening on twitter soon. Trump's two twitter accounts have gained over five million followers in the last three days. Most are empty bot accounts which have no activity. Accounts are being added at a hundred bots an hour. Many people are reporting their accounts are now following the Trump and related bot accounts without authorization. Some are unfollowing and blocking Trump only to have their accounts reconnecting to the Trump accounts. People are being advised to change their passwords and disable any twitter related apps. My guess is that some kind of shit is about to hit the fan.

Jack - The Twisted Genius ... , 31 May 2017 at 09:26 PM
TTG, Sir

The Twitter bot anarchy on Trump's feed is all par for the course in this period of incredible developments in software. The rapid iteration cycle is moving even faster than even experts can comprehend.

Hillary right on cue is now claiming that a thousand Russian agents on Facebook and bots on Twitter upended her "sure thing" campaign. Pathetic!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4560344/Hillary-Trump-colluded-Russia-create-fake-news.html

She raised over a billion dollars. Why didn't she hire 10,000 Indians and Chinese click fraudsters and all those snowflake kids to swamp social media? IMO, this entitled mindset is exactly why voters in Michigan and Pennsylvania rejected her for even Trump.

Political campaigns have always been a blood sport. As they say, all's fair in love and war.

The Twisted Genius - , 01 June 2017 at 04:44 PM
Jack,

I think we're pretty much in agreement here. All elections from this point on are going to be full on info ops using every psychological and technological trick in the book. This is why I think we should study what the Russians did in 2016 in detail. I'd like the electorate to be as aware of all these info op/marketing techniques as possible. Then we should study what the Trump and Clinton campaigns did and didn't do. What we'll find it the Clinton and the DNC ran a coal powered campaign while Trump and the RNC ran a turbo-diesel campaign and the Russians ran a nuclear campaign. It just happened that Trump, the RNC and the Russians were eventually working towards the same goal - defeat Clinton. That doesn't necessarily mean there was any collusion or witting cooperation between Trump and the Russians.

This certainly isn't the whole story. Clinton stood for staying the course, more of the same with a strong possibility of a hot war with Russia thrown in as a bonus. Trump stood for trying something else. Given the strikingly divided nature of the electorate, that kind of battle of ideas is a 50-50 proposition at best. There was no sure thing.

Fred - The Twisted Genius ... , 01 June 2017 at 05:26 PM
TTG,

There are quite a few other state and non-state actors involved also.

Jack - The Twisted Genius ... , 01 June 2017 at 07:00 PM
TTG, Sir

"All elections from this point on are going to be full on info ops using every psychological and technological trick in the book ."

Weren't political campaigns always attempts at persuasion and dissuasion? There's just more tools available now and people are more connected and acquire information from a larger number of sources.

It's not Trump's & the Russians fault that Hillary ran a "coal-powered campaign". She had all the money and the same tools that at least Trump had. Bottom line is she didn't execute well and consequently didn't bring home the bacon. No different than two teams playing in a championship game, where the winner typically executes better.

Also, didn't the Brits, French, Israelis, Chinese, and Saudis get involved too? You can't blame anyone from trying their darndest to not have the US arrow on their back. After all, many have an existential interest, considering the track record of the US in mindlessly intervening in the internal affairs of sovereign nations.

The real insidious aspect is the post-election info op by elements in our IC and it seems from David Habbakuk's posts the British IC, as well as the MSM. This has some serious traitorous behavior that if not nipped now will morph into something even more dangerous. IMO, when the immense power of the national security apparatus gets subverted to overturn a legitimate democratic process, we've crossed the threshold to totalitarianism.

turcopolier , 30 May 2017 at 04:54 PM
freudennschade

Their substance is nothing, less than nothing. For foreign governments to wish to find ways to influence an American Administration s completely normal. Do you not think our NATO allies have the same conversations as well as our lovely Israeli friends. What do you think ambassadors do for a living? They advise on how to affect hat? As or Kushner's commo proposal, it was a stupid idea but hardly treasonous. you have to remember that the Trump people were not yet the US government. pl

mauisurfer - turcopolier ... , 30 May 2017 at 05:20 PM
worth noting. jfk opened a back channel to Khrushchev after he was elected and before he was sworn in as president
Freudenschade - turcopolier ... , 31 May 2017 at 08:12 AM
Col.,

Ambassador Kislyak is certainly doing his job. My question wasn't so much about the Russians but rather about the Americans. Is the sum total of the leaks -- if true -- of any concern to you?

Matthew - turcopolier ... , 31 May 2017 at 09:31 AM
If the Russians really wanted to troll us, members of their embassy staff could hand out cookies to protesters in DC.
james - , 31 May 2017 at 12:34 PM
good one!
steve , 30 May 2017 at 05:28 PM
"By long standing legal precedent journalistic projects are immune from prosecution for disclosing government secrets"

I don't especially want the press to have to censor what they publish. As long as it is not something which will obviously place people in jeopardy, they should publish. It should be the job of those in charge in the government to keep stuff from leaking to begin with.

Steve

plantman , 30 May 2017 at 05:36 PM
bks says...

Excommunicate me if you must, but Kushner asking to use encrypted communications from the Russian embassy is the very definition of treason."

Treason??? Even the lowly NY Times disagrees with your extremist analysis. Here's an excerpt from today's paper:

"responding to questions from The Times about the meetings with Mr. Kislyak and Mr. Gorkov, Ms. Hicks said the meetings were part of an effort by Mr. Kushner to improve relations between the United States and Russia, and to identify areas of possible cooperation....

But the Trump transition was unique in its unwillingness to use the government's communications lines and briefing material for its dealings with many foreign governments, partly because of concern that Obama administration officials might be monitoring the calls.... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/us/politics/jared-kushner-russia-investigation.html?_r=0

So the Trump people figured out what any sentient being has known from the very beginning, that the crooked Obama team and their allies in the IC were sweeping up all their communications to derail their political agenda which involved normalizing relations with Russia.

Is that what you call "treason"???

Sheesh!

J , 30 May 2017 at 08:12 PM
Colonel,

Speaking of the treasonous shows, did you know that Morning Joe Scarborough and Mika are now engaged? Also, Mika's daddy Zbigniew Brzezinski passed away 4 days ago.

DrFrank , 30 May 2017 at 10:52 PM
I don't see any evidence that Trump's hold on the Presidency is in any real or imminent danger.

The Russia scandal newsfeed is slowing him down a bit, which may not be a bad thing given his reputation for impetuous decision making, lose talk, arrogance when it comes to the details and a tendency to keep it in the family, or at least among loyalists. If the Dems think the Russia thing is going to win them control of the House, they need to think again, it seems to me.

Coronel Lang, there are some things I really don't understand. Perhaps you could explain:

Could it really be a big secret that the IC is able to decrypt Russian communications? I would imagine there is a constant tug of war here: sometimes the US IC is able to do decode and sometimes not, as the systems on both sides are upgraded and changed periodically.

What are the goals of those in the IC who are supposed to be sabotaging Trump? What exactly is it that they are trying to accomplish or prevent?

What precisely are the two side of the controversy over what is the right stance toward Russia and for what reasons? The answer to this could include Syria as well as the Ukraine and NATO.

What was Trump trying to achieve by visiting Saudi Arabia in the way he did and what is to be gained and by whom in making Iran the great enemy? Did he achieve it?

Many thanks if you take a shot at it.

Tidewater , 30 May 2017 at 11:35 PM
Tidewater to All:

The Eurasia Review has an OpEd by "Mina" with the headline: "Washington Post Exposed NSA's Ability to Intercept Chatter from Russian Embassy." It can be googled. Even has a photo of Jared.

Mina refers to and relies on Col. Lang as an authority and notes his shock and outrage at this publishing of Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI). Mina states, among other things: "In other words, for the sake of causing some minor embarrassment to the President, the Washington Post struck a major blow against US intelligence."

Babak Makkinejad - , 01 June 2017 at 10:31 AM
I had watched an analogous phenomenon in post-Revolutionary Iran; the competing political cliques and bands often leaking this or that information in order to harm their political opponents; always being oblivious to the wider damage to the national interests.

Evidently, that sort of extreme parochialism is not confined to Thrid World countries.

fanto , 30 May 2017 at 11:54 PM
Colonel,
Recently you mentioned how tired you are of the 'mendacious BS'. Be assured you are not alone with your fatigue. I am not only tired of it but also deeply shocked, to find myself 50 years later in my old age confronted again with such mendacious BS. In my youth under Soviet domination it was totally impossible to imagine that one day the 'russki' FM would make jokes about how the roles have reversed and the Pravda and Isviestia ('no truth' and 'no news') would have their imitators or heirs in USA. So, Colonel, do not get tired and have a beautiful, restful Birthday! ( and a glass of Champagne will do good ).
Wunduk , 31 May 2017 at 04:52 AM
I vividly imagine Russian analysts now sifting through all Dec. 2016 communications for that remark: able to influence the Trump administration through publication of (financial) derogatory information. Not an easy task, but with the keyword 'financial information' they afterwards will know pretty clearly which frequency and encryption method is no longer good enough.
Why would there be legal protection for the journalists for bloating out this capability, however indirectly, in the absence of a clear public requirement? If the publisher feels there was one they could easily explain it to a court, II assume. Is there not a code of conduct or legal responsibility of each publisher in the United States? And if not wouldn't it be possible to use a copyright infringement law?
Old Microbiologist , 31 May 2017 at 05:32 AM
It is interesting. I saw a clip from CNN yesterday (can't find it now so probably erased from the internet) where they were trying to push a panel of (not-so) "average" Americans to agree with the premise of Russian tampering. To their credit these particular Americans questioned the entire premise and instead turned the tables on the American government questioning credibility of unnamed sources etc. as well as past misdeeds. I was pleasantly surprised at the intelligent answers given and the consternation of the interviewer. But, what is shocking to me were the written responses on the posting many of which were in the grain of "these Americans were treasonous and should be shot". Probably many of the posts were bots but if this is true then the liberals are in deep trouble and in complete denial about what has been happening in the US and especially US foreign policy.

What will be interesting is what the response is going to be when the illegal US base in Syria is attacked by the Syrian Army, perhaps today. This is a put up or shut up moment in history. The same thing is going to happen in North Korea soon. I also noticed a interesting lack of concern for Israel test firing an ICBM (a rogue nation with illegal nuclear weapons), yet we said nothing about it. Korea on the other hand, is the opposite, and we are coming close to war over the same thing.

Regarding the leaks, I believe it is imperative for Trump to find them fast and perhaps maybe have a few shot as these are the real treasonous Americans. I also think he needs to go after Podesta, Soros, McCain et. al. in earnest and remove them from the board. He needs to get ahead of this and start removing obstacles. Playing nice isn't working.

scott douglas , 31 May 2017 at 06:33 AM
As I said to an astonished 'liberal' friend last week, forgoing fruitless confrontation with Russia is a Policy, not a Crime.

A clearly and openly stated policy enunciated during the campaign in prime-time, on many a debate stage. The studied Clinton rebuttal? "You are Putin's puppet!" This is still the only sound we hear from the 'resistance'. No evidence.

Now, six months on, to remind a fellow citizen of the results of the election is become nearly pointless. There is a sputtering madness gripping these deeply misguided partisan defenders of the foreign policy status quo that has become actually dangerous. I thought Trump should have made a number of publicly staged arrests, complete with a Marine detachment and cameras rolling, by now. But instead, Clapper and Brennan are themselves destroying the reputations of the institutions they supposedly cherish, and their compliant media megaphone, with their own ragged flailings.

There will be no impeachment. Check the latest poll. Trump would win more handily today than after this Orwellian blitz has run on for over half a year.

Madness! Of course, I aggressively snapped off the tube when Clapper appeared on PBS last night, so maybe I am becoming infected, too...

Heros , 31 May 2017 at 06:50 AM
Although all the parasites in Washington love to give lip service to things like "the constitution" and "our freedom" their actions since 9/11, and even long before, are proof that this is merely gruel for the serfs. Most of those who started the treason and sedition are long dead or are on deaths door anyway. The toothpaste is already out of the tube.

It is the lower echelons of the parasites deriving their livelihoods off of the state who cling to some kind of legitimacy from government in Washington. Just look at the way the Democrat statists reject and criticism of Hilary with or without proof.

Those of us who have personally experienced the vengefulness and tyranny of the federal government have long given up hope of anything good coming out of that cesspool on the Potomac. We are merely watching the buzzards fighting over the remains of the carcass. There is no such thing as good buzzards or bad buzzards, so we expect nothing from them.

Lars , 31 May 2017 at 06:52 AM
No doubt there is unprecedented leaking going on and the question is: Why? It appears that many in the government are appalled at decisions and maybe even more at how decisions are made. Then there is the problem with having a president who is increasingly being disrespected, which started while he was a candidate. You have to consider that many of his problems are self-inflicted.

Having a beleaguered and weaker presidency is not a good thing. It is starting to resemble the late 60's and early 70's, which is the last time we had a seriously divided nation, with many lasting results and not all of them positive.

It seems that we are inching towards some kind of constitutional crisis and that is not a good thing either.

Thomas - , 31 May 2017 at 02:03 PM
"No doubt there is unprecedented leaking going on and the question is: Why?"

Public revelation that those previously in charge were giving aid and comfort to the enemy (Manpads to Al Qadea. etc. etc.) of the United States for the benefit of another foreign entity. So that entity is having its agents pull out the stops to keep the truth in a dark musty corner.

turcopolier , 31 May 2017 at 09:55 AM
freudenschade

Aside frm the stupidity of wanting to run a back channel in a Russian diplomatic facility, no IMO the "revelations" amount to nothing. The release of the COMINT material to the media is a crime that should be punished with imprisonment. pl

turcopolier , 31 May 2017 at 09:59 AM
Lars

"many in the government" IMO the US spies are either formers like JB, and JC or are politically appointed Obama holdovers. Career government people have it in their DNA NOT to destroy American intelligence capabilities by telling intelligence targets that we can read their traffic. pl

turcopolier , 31 May 2017 at 10:53 AM
DrFrank

"Could it really be a big secret that the IC is able to decrypt Russian communications?" Could it really have been a big secret that the British solved the Enigma cypher system? Yes, it was. Could it really have been a big secret that US Navy and US Army SIGINT people solved the Japanese diplomatic and naval cypher systems? Yes, it was. The Germans and the Japanese understood that it was theoretically possible for their systems to be solved but they did not believe that it could actually be done. As a result the German U Boat fleet was decimated through their position reporting and the Japanese lost four fleet carriers at Midway. If the Germans and Japanese had understood that their communications were compromised these benefits to the Allies would not have occurred. Traffic analysis (look it up)played a major role as well as cryptanalysis. The Russians now KNOW that a umber of their commo systems are compromised and they will go all out to replace these capabilities with others that we will work for years to penetrate. pl

HDL , 31 May 2017 at 11:15 AM
All:

Let' be real careful bandying about words like "treason". The Founders, themselves guilty of treason (in the Crown's eyes), specifically defined what treason is. Treason is the only crime specified in the Constitution"

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
Article III | Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

There's lots of other crimes committed by these miscreants and hanging is too good for them. Treason isn't one of them.

Excuse the pedantry.

turcopolier , 31 May 2017 at 12:14 PM
HDL

You must be speaking of someone other than me. I have bee careful not to use the word. pl

David Habakkuk , 31 May 2017 at 01:24 PM
All,

By contrast to the conversations between Kushner and Kislyak, it seems to me possible that the offence here may simply be fabrication of non-existent conversations.

Having stated that 'the FBI would not comment on whether any of the claims discussed in the intercepts have been verified', the CNN report continues:

'But US counterintelligence investigators were already looking into the Russian claims during the summer of 2016, before the public became aware of similar claims in a dossier created for political opponents of Trump by a former British spy. The former spy, Christopher Steele, shared some of those findings with the FBI during the summer of 2016.

'CNN has not been able to verify the allegations about the derogatory information in the dossier, but current and former US officials say some of the Russia-to-Russia conversations in the dossier have been corroborated.'

A number of points.

1. There is ample evidence that in his time as a 'former British spy' Steele pedalled the most outrageous disinformation against leaders MI6 wanted to target. Also, it is material that he is patently not very competent at 'information operations' – the claims he and his associates feed to the media keep changing.

This is not noticed only because, for a variety of reasons, contemporary journalists are happy to act as stenographers for the spooks (however corrupt and incompetent these demonstrably are.) This applies equally, whether the journalists come from the 'right' or the 'left'.

When the story of Steele's involvement with the BuzzFeed dossier first broke in January, the – traditionally right-wing – 'Telegraph' reported that he had been case officer for the late Alexander Litvinenko. However, when he emerged out of hiding in March, the – traditionally left-wing – 'Guardian' reported that:

'Several of the lurid stories about him that have appeared in the press have been wrong, said friends. The stories include claims that Steele met Alexander Litvinenko, the Russian dissident who was murdered in 2006 with a radioactive cup of tea, probably on Putin's orders.

'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.'

(See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/12/christopher-steelethe-former-british-spy-created-donald-trump/ ; https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/07/former-mi6-agent-christopher-steele-behind-trump-dossier-returns-to-work .)

2. If Steele and his associates got leery about drawing attention to his involvement with Litvinenko, they had good reason.

According to the 'Vanity Fair' report linked to in the CNN story, Steele was head of the MI6 Russia Desk from 2004 to 2009. We know that Litvinenko became an MI6 agent prior to 2004, Steele would have had overall charge of his activities when he was disseminating disinformation designed to show, among other things, that the notorious Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had been attempted to secure a 'mini nuclear bomb' for Al Qaeda.

Among many other accusations his agent was disseminating was the claim that Romano Prodi was a KGB/FSB agent. (Time was when this might have worried the 'Guardian' – not now.)

I produced evidence on the 'mini nuclear bomb' claim – only a fragment of a mass of material I brought to the attention of Sir Robert Owen, and most of which he suppressed in his report – in comments Colonel Lang posted on SST after that report was published.

(See http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/01/david-hakkuk-on-sir-robert-owens-inquiry.html .)

3. According to the interviews supposedly recorded with Litvinenko by Detective Inspector Brent Hyatt, presented in evidence to Owen, and taken at face value by him, Steele's ignorance of his agent's activities was quite phenomenal.

What we are asked to believe is that, immediately following his drinking tea with the dastardly Kremlin agents Andrei Lugovoi and Dmitri Kovtun on 1 November, Litvinenko suspected they had tried to poison him. What we are also asked to believe is that MI6 knew nothing of this until Litvinenko told Hyatt to 'phone his 'handler', 'Martin' on 20 November.

From the account by Luke Harding of the 'Guardian':

'The interview abruptly stops. It's 5.16pm. Hyatt dials the long telephone number, reaches "Martin", and tells him that Litvinenko is gravely ill in hospital, the victim of an apparent poisoning by two mysterious Russians.

'It appears to be the first time that MI6 – an organisation famed for its professionalism – learns of Litvinenko's plight.'

(See https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/19/alexander-litvinenko-the-man-who-solved-his-own-murder .)

4. So Litvinenko was screaming out that Putin had tried to kill him, and Steele didn't know anything about it? If you believe that, you will believe anything.

The interviews are, transparently, forged, and anyone who thinks that MI6 deserves to be 'famed for its professionalism' is either simply ignorant, or a fool or a knave. (With Harding, it's probably all three together.)

What was actually happening was that Steele and his associates were first trying to keep the whole story of the poisoning under wraps, and then going round in circles trying to find a reasonably convincing means of obscuring the truth. (So too were those in the know in Russian intelligence.)

For the way in which Steele and his minions could not get their accounts of the vehicle(s) by which Litvinenko travelled into London on the day he was supposedly murdered straight, and many other contradictions, see the SST post to which I have linked.

5. What then happens if you look at the BuzzFeed dossier against this background?

What we know is that the latest date on the materials from the DNC which WikiLeaks started publishing on 22 July 2016 is 25 May 2016. We also know that James Comey never got the FBI to look at the DNC servers. Instead he relied upon what is – frankly – a heap of old garbage supplied by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'Crowdstrike', starting I think on 15 June.

How can anyone defend this privatisation of a key investigative task? It should be quite sufficient grounds for sacking Comey.

6. On 20 June 2016, if the dossier is to be believed, Christopher Steele was ready with the first installment of his heap of garbage. Unfortunately, it seems that he and Alperovitch did not coordinate their stories – as their accounts of the hacking are totally contradictory.

7. Moreover, the BuzzFeed dossier has now produced three separate lawsuits. The most recent, filed on 26 May, is by Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven and German Khan of 'Alfa Group'. As the summons notes, the name is spelt incorrectly in the dossier as 'Alpha Group'.

But hell, you don't really expect the head of MI6's Russia Desk to be familiar with the names of one of the most prominent Russian business empires, do you? (If they have an 'America desk', its head probably writes that Bill Gates founded 'Mikrosoft'.)

8. Previously, actions were brought by the internet entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev – again misspelled, as Gubarov – and his company XBT Holdings against BuzzFeed in Florida and Steele in London. To anyone familiar with the history of Litvinenko's claims, what the BuzzFeed dossier claims about Gubarev looks like vintage Steele:

'[redacted] reported that over the period March-September 2016 a company called XBT/Webzilla and its affiliates had been using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct "altering operations" against the Democratic Party leadership. Entities linked to one Alexei GUBAROV [sic] were involved and he and another hacking expert, both recruited under duress by the FSB, Seva KAPSUGOVICH, were significant players in this operation. In Prague, COHEN agreed contingency plans for various scenarios to protect the operations, but in particular what was to be done in the event that Hillary CLINTON won the presidency. It was important in this event that all cash payments owed were made quickly and discreetly and that cyber and that cyber and other operators were stood down / able to go effectively to ground to cover their traces.'

9. On 27 March, lawyers for Gubarev filed a response to BuzzFeed's motion to dismiss, entitled 'Six Ways Buzzfeed Has Misled the Court (Number Two Will Amaze You) and a Picture of a Kitten.' It is entertaining. In the event, the judge ruled in Gubarev's favour.

(See https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/29/six-ways-buzzfeed-has-misled-the-court-number-two-will-amaze-you-and-a-picture-of-a-kitten/ .)

10. On 4 April, Steele's lawyers filed his defence in the London suit.

(See https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/28/trump-russia-intelligence-uk-government-m16-kremlin .

A point of interest in Steele's accounts of his relation with the American company Fusion is summarised in the 'Guardian' account:

'The document said that he passed the memos to Fusion on the understanding that Fusion would not disclose the material to any third parties without the approval of Steele and Orbis. They did agree to Fusion providing a copy to Senator John McCain after the veteran Republican had been told about the existence of Steele's research by Sir Andrew Wood, a former UK ambassador to Moscow and an Orbis associate, at a conference in Canada on 8 November.'

The suggestion that Wood had been involved with Steele's company Orbis for a long time tends to strengthen the impression that its supposedly independent status acted as cover for projects championed by influential circles in the British 'sistema' – and that these were intimately involved in the campaign against Trump.

11. On the role of disingenuous claims about 'SIGINT' in 'information operations', it may be worth looking back at the all-out propaganda offensive that heralded the opening of Owen's travesty of an inquiry. A report in 'The American Interest' was headlined: 'NSA Proves Russia Behind Litvinenko's Murder.'

(See https://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/01/26/nsa-proves-russia-behind-litvinenkos-murder/ .)

At a time when claims made by Steele may be subjected to rather more rigorous scrutiny in the courts than that provided by Owen and his team, and where a collapse in his credibility threatens to have large knock-on effects, it would not be surprising is, as it were, people in the NSA were once again prepared to be cooperative in maintaining his fictions.

The Twisted Genius - David Habakkuk ... , 31 May 2017 at 08:34 PM
David Habakkuk wrote:

"We also know that James Comey never got the FBI to look at the DNC servers. Instead he relied upon what is – frankly – a heap of old garbage supplied by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'Crowdstrike', starting I think on 15 June. How can anyone defend this privatisation of a key investigative task?"

I admire your thoroughness and detailed analyses, often excruciatingly detailed, but I take serious issue with this particular statement. I'm afraid you and many others are not at all familiar with how the world of cyber analysis works. Most of the attacks that require analysis and mitigation occur on IT systems belonging to non-governmental entities. These private entities are usually loathe to even admit that they have been hacked. They rely on other private entities like CrowdStrike, Mandiant and McAfee to mitigate these attacks and keep that information out of the press and out of the hands of government. The NDAs covering these relationships are draconian. This has always been the case. Given this environment , IT security companies like CrowdStrike, Mandiant and McAfee have a wider and more in-depth knowledge of worldwide cyber threats than even our NSA.

The FBI and NSA are well aware of this reality and often rely on these private IT security companies for their extended expertise. In 2011 the NSA turned to McAfee for assistance in dealing with a massive intrusion into the networks of several major defense contractors and the compromise of a security technology that was vital to systems in the DOD, IC and the rest of the government. Dmitri Alperovitch was a vital part of that McAfee team. That private security team was instrumental in mitigating the threat and identifying a nation-state actor as the source of that threat. This happens time after time, but we will seldom hear of it. And when we do, we never get the full story or all the evidence. This community is unusually adept in the art of STFU. That and the NDAs are truly draconian.

The FBI has several programs designed to entice private companies to share information about cyber intrusions with the government. I am familiar with one that has a good track record of success. The National Cyber-Forensics & Training Alliance (NCFTA) is a non-profit corporation founded in 2002 in Pittsburgh, PA. It is the brain child of a particularly enlightened FBI Special Agent. He explained the delicate relationships he developed with private companies based on mutual trust. There was never any Fed flashing of badges and demands for cooperation. That approach is always counterproductive. But this is a small effort given the size of the FBI and the magnitude of the cyber intrusion problem.

This is the world I worked in for a decade. And this is why I find your question of "how anyone defend this privatisation of a key investigative task?" to be so off the mark.

David Habakkuk - The Twisted Genius ... , 01 June 2017 at 01:27 PM
TTG,

I will apologise – up to a point – for the fact that my analyses are often 'excruciatingly detailed.'

There is however one good reason for this, as well as some bad ones.

Over the years, it has become clear to me that, in many 'information operations', it is convenient for people in the United States to have key parts run out of Britain. So it becomes important to try to provide to Americans the detailed information which might enable them to expose the pernicious effect 'loops of lies' running between Washington and London may have on the politics of both countries.

As to 'CrowdStrike'. A rather important point is that this was not a private contractor chosen by the FBI – but one brought in by the DNC. As a central question was whether what was at issue was a leak or a hack, and if it was the former that organisation had every reason to want to cover it up, even leaving out all other matters, 'CrowdStrike' should not have been accepted as objective by the FBI.

Then, however, look at the sequence – which brings up the question of British involvement.

When he pointed to 'Fancy Bear' and 'Cozy Bear' as having been responsible for hacking the DNC on 16 June 2016, Alperovitch explained that 'their tradecraft is superb, operational security second to none etc etc.' He went on at length about how virtuoso they were supposed to be – confronted by Moriarty-figures like this, only sleuths with Sherlock Holmes-like powers like himself could expect to cope.

It was on the following day that a site called 'Ars Tecnica' published the revelations which appeared to indicate that, in fact, the hackers had clumsily left indications pointing unambiguously to a Russian origin – most notably, the Christian name and patronymic of Dzerzhinsky.

These had, apparently, been 'teased out of the documents and noted on Twitter by an independent security researcher who goes by the handle PwnAllTheThings.' This, it turned out, was a certain Mark Tait.

On 28 July, Tait produced a post on the 'Lawfare' site, entitled 'On the Need for Official Attribution of Russia's DNC Hack.'

(See https://www.lawfareblog.com/need-official-attribution-russias-dnc-hack .)

The bio accompanying the article reads:

'Matt Tait is the CEO and founder of Capital Alpha Security, a UK based security consultancy which focuses on research into software vulnerabilities, exploit mitigations and applied cryptography. Prior to founding Capital Alpha Security, Tait worked for Google Project Zero, was a principal security consultant for iSEC Partners, and NGS Secure, and worked as an information security specialist for GCHQ.'

Note that: 'worked as an information security specialist for GCHQ.'

The story Tait tells reads to me, as classic 'information operations' – how initially he did not believe the 'CrowdStrike' revelations, and then was converted after the document dump by 'Guccifer 2.0' – and the damning evidence of the 'Felix Edmundovich'.

Of this he writes:

'It's an operational security failure by a group whose malware was riddled with other basic operational security failures. While amusing at first, the hackers' attempts to address it in future leaks was so overt and ham-fisted that it just served to highlight the initial error.'

Perhaps Tait and Alperovitch should get together and try and get their story straight. What are the FSB and in particular GRU hackers supposed to be – criminal masterminds, or incompetent petty thieves who even Inspector Lestrade could expose in twenty-minutes?

And then Tait also mentions Thomas Rid, of King's College.

In the 'information operations' designed to allow the American, and British, governments, to hand Syria over to the jihadists, and empower people wearing lightly modified versions of the 'Black Sun' and 'Wolfsangel' symbols in Ukraine, Eliot Higgins, who first ran the 'Brown Moses Blog', and now runs 'Bellingcat', has played a crucial role.

As you will have seen, Professor Theodore Postol of MIT is back trying to scotch the latest 'Bellingcat' lies.

If you do a few quick Google searches, you will find that Higgins is a 'Nonresident Senior Fellow, Digital Forensic Research Lab, Future Europe Initiative' at the Atlantic Council . You will also find that Dmitri Alperovitch is 'Nonresident Senior Fellow, Cyber Statecraft Initiative' at the Atlantic Council.

You will also find that Higgins is 'Visiting Research Associate' at the 'Centre for Science and Security Studies' at King's College, London. If you google Thomas Rid, you will find that he is 'Professor of Security Studies' in the 'Department of War Studies' at the same institution.

Among the sources of funding which Higgins has acknowledged is Google – for whom, apparently, Mark Tait worked, after leaving GCHQ.

And then, on top of all this, we have the appearance of Christopher Steele in a key role in the 'information operations' intended to establish that the WikiLeaks material originated from Russian hacking, rather than an internal leak.

As I have been 'excrucriatingly detailed' enough for one post, I will not go into my encounters with Sir Lawrence Freedman, who was instrumental in shaping the War Studies Department at King's, and also in persuading that dolt Tony Blair that it was a good idea to invade Iraq – and was then appointed to the Chilcot Inquiry team. Suffice it to say that I know that he is simply a different version of idiot.

Nor will I revisit what I have already said about Steele.

But really, if citizens of the United States are prepared to see someone corrupt former employees of British intelligence like Tait and Steele play a major role in the attempted reversal of the results of a Presidential election, then on your own heads be it.

What did Franklin say: 'A republic, if you can keep it.'

Babak Makkinejad - David Habakkuk ... , 01 June 2017 at 03:18 PM
I think there is no other way than investigating things in great details - into the weeds, so to speak - in this case as many others.

One used to be able to rely upon the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Des Moines Register, the Boston Globe, and the Chicago Tribune for that; also, all of that has disappeared over the last 20 years or so.

NPR was very good, almost as good as the old BBC, before Reagan gutted it and it never recovered.

Byzantine bureaucracy had a lot of influence on policy.


The Twisted Genius - David Habakkuk ... , 01 June 2017 at 10:21 PM
David Habakkuk,

No need for any apologies. It was a tongue-in-cheek observation, not a complaint. As far as Alperovitch and CrowdStrike goes, I think we can all benefit from more excruciating details than you have provided. Dimitri is one of those Russians who learned how to code on a blackboard rather than on a keyboard. I've had up close and personal relationships with a number of these types. The best of the Russian hackers came from this group. These old school hackers do recognize the virtuosity in a piece of code and can wax poetic about it. It's just their nature. On the other hand, there are very few hackers of this caliber still in the hacking business today. Most are now one step away from script kiddies. That is the bulk of the patriotic Russian hackers who Putin referred to today as possibly involved in the election hacking. I have personally witnessed this methodology of guiding an army of non-governmental patriotic hackers to achieve governmental objectives on several occasions.

The FBI called on Dimitri to help guide one of their premier long term undercover cyber operations. In 2005 he worked with SA Keith Mularski establishing the very successful Dark Net operation. Keith, who I know well, thinks very highly of Dimitri. Throughout his career he specialized in threat intelligence. He had several years of experience tracking Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear intrusions before he began the DNC investigation. In all situations I know where attribution is made, a multi-year investigation is part of the process. Researchers like Jeff Carr are right to point out that attribution from a single intrusion is damned near impossible. I also doubt CrowdStrike hung their claim of attribution on the Dzerzhinsky thing. These are the types of things Dimitri coached Keith to avoid in the Dark Net operation. This is why the NSA called on him and McAfee to assist in some of their investigations.

You are right in pointing out that it was the DNC who chose CrowdStrike rather than the FBI. However, this is how these investigations always work. The client decides who does the investigation and when that investigation is released to the FBI (if at all). The head of the CrowdStrike team that did the on site investigation at the DNC was Shawn Henry, the former head of the FBI Cyber Division. I'm fairly certain the FBI was quite satisfied with who did the investigation.

HDL , 31 May 2017 at 03:26 PM
Certainly not you, sir.
J , 31 May 2017 at 05:29 PM
Colonel,

These journos sure know how to wreck a battlefield don't they.

Gordon Wilson , 31 May 2017 at 09:39 PM
Colonel I have refrained from any posting anywhere for any reason for months, but since the discussion seems to turn to decryption so often I thought you might be interested in knowing about network management systems built into Intel and AMD based machines for years, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology
Hardware-based management does not depend on the presence of an OS or locally installed management agent. Hardware-based management has been available on Intel/AMD based computers in the past, but it has largely been limited to auto-configuration using DHCP or BOOTP for dynamic IP address allocation and diskless workstations, as well as wake-on-LAN (WOL) for remotely powering on systems.[6] AMT is not intended to be used by itself; it is intended to be used with a software management application.[1] It gives a management application (and thus, the system administrator who uses it) access to the PC down the wire, in order to remotely do tasks that are difficult or sometimes impossible when working on a PC that does not have remote functionalities built into it.[1][3][7]
...
Intel has confirmed a Remote Elevation of Privilege bug (CVE-2017-5689) in its Management Technology, on 1 May 2017.[12] Every Intel platform with either Intel Standard Manageability, Active Management Technology, or Small Business Technology, from Nehalem in 2008 to Kaby Lake in 2017 has a remotely exploitable security hole in the IME (Intel Management Engine).[13][14]
I think our second O in OODA is getting fuzzed if we don't consider some of the observations found in "Powershift" by Toffler as well.

The point being is that many Intel and AMD based computers can and have been owned by various governments and groups for years, and at this level have access to any information on these machines before the encryption software is launched to encrypt any communications.

If this known software management tool is already on board, then extrapolation Toffler's chipping warning to unannounced or unauthorized by various actors, one begins to see where various nation states have gone back to typewriters for highly sensitive information, or are building their own chip foundries, and writing their own operating systems and TCP/IP protocols, and since these things are known knowns, one would not be too far fetched in assuming the nation state level players are communicating over something entirely different than you and I are using. How that impacts the current news cycle, and your interpretation of those events, I leave to your good judgment.

I would urge all of my fellow Americans, especially those with a megaphone, to also take care that we are not the subject of the idiom divide and conquer instead of its' master. To that end I think the concept of information overload induced by the internet may in fact be part of the increasing polarization and information bubbles we see forming with liberals and conservatives. This too fuzzes the second O in OODA and warps the D and thus the A, IMHO.

Ingolf Eide , 01 June 2017 at 12:23 AM

This serial leaking is the most visible sign of a deeper battle between the foreign policy "establishment" and Trump. While much discussed here, the causes and potential consequences of this crucially important showdown are rarely touched on in the mainstream media; they're far too caught up in the hue and cry of the chase.

"Security Breach - Trump's tussle with the bureaucratic state", Michael J Glennon's article in the latest Harper's, is an exception:

https://harpers.org/archive/2017/06/security-breach/?single=1

"Many never-Trumpers in both parties now regard the security bureaucracy as their last, best hope. Following the Washington Post's disclosure on December 9 that the CIA believed Russia had intervened in the election to help Trump, the agency overnight became the great darling of many Trump critics. They urged it to share its secrets with the Electoral College with the goal of preventing the president-elect from taking office. Trump was "being really dumb" by feuding with the CIA, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. "You take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you." Francis Fukuyama hoped that "America's enormous bureaucracy" would restrain Trump. Bill Kristol proclaimed he would "prefer the deep state to the Trump state." And The New Yorker assured readers that the intelligence community's managers were likely to challenge Trump before Congress, which was as it should be: "This is just the sort of thing we want to see happening" as part of "the fabled 'checks and balances' in the U.S. system."

This sudden embrace of the security agencies as the republic's last line of defence is of course constitutional nonsense as well as being remarkably shortsighted, potentially suicidally so. Glennon again:

"But consider the price of victory if the security directorate were somehow to establish itself as a check on those presidential policies - or officials - that it happened to dislike. To formally charge the bureaucracy with providing a check on the president, Congress, or the courts would represent an entirely new form of government, a system in which institutionalized bureaucratic autocracy displaces democratic accountability."

Glennon thinks Trump may surprise those who "blithely assume that the security bureaucracy will fight him to the death". As he says "it has never faced the raw hostility of an all out frontal assault from the White House." Indeed his greater concern is that should Trump go all in to quell this rebellion, "splintered and demoralised factions within the bureaucracy could actually support - not oppose - many potential Trump initiatives, such as stepped-up drone strikes, cyber attacks, covert action, immigration bands, and mass surveillance." From where things stand right now, that seems like a good problem to have.

In any event, it's mildly encouraging to see some discussion of the broader principles. I still think Trump has much to gain from putting these matters firmly within this larger framework and hammering it hard at every level.

Thomas - , 01 June 2017 at 03:52 PM
"This sudden embrace of the security agencies as the republic's last line of defence is of course constitutional nonsense as well as being remarkably shortsighted, potentially suicidally so."

They are using this not for defence of the republic, but for sparing these usurping subversives from just punishment.

bernard , 01 June 2017 at 04:58 AM
Col Lang:

Let me see if I have got this straight. It sounds like an enigma variation. Some damned traitors in Washington have just told the Russians that their top secret communications have been cracked. Its a bit like the BBC telling the Germans that their enigma machine/ code has been cracked. As a result, the Russians/ Germans are now going all out to change their encryption codes/ procedures.

Is this what you are saying or am I overstating/ dramatizing the matter?

turcopolier , 01 June 2017 at 09:44 AM
Bernard

You have it right. I would add that today's electronic cipher gear is much more sophisticated than in the era of Enigma and therefore the loss is so much greater. pl

[Jun 04, 2017] National security parasites and Trump leaks

Notable quotes:
"... There is a special term for those folk who are mainly involved in justified their own existence: "national security parasites". Their existence does increase chances of accidental war with Russia or China because they want to defend not the USA, but their lucrative positions and streams of income. That requires certain level of hostilities to be maintained. In other words the USA needs a permanent enemy to justify military expenses and there is a network network of consultants, think-tanks and neocon operatives (including democratic) tasked with this goal. An integral part of MIC -- its propaganda arm, is you wish. ..."
Jun 04, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com

libezkova , June 04, 2017 at 12:41 PM

"a huge military establishment, the Pentagon needs to regularly justify its existence."

There is a special term for those folk who are mainly involved in justified their own existence: "national security parasites". Their existence does increase chances of accidental war with Russia or China because they want to defend not the USA, but their lucrative positions and streams of income. That requires certain level of hostilities to be maintained. In other words the USA needs a permanent enemy to justify military expenses and there is a network network of consultants, think-tanks and neocon operatives (including democratic) tasked with this goal. An integral part of MIC -- its propaganda arm, is you wish.

Some ways of justification, especially recently used by democratic operatives to attack Trump, look suspiciously close to treason to some observers.

OK, let's assume that Russians are the US enemies. If so, then the recent leaks about Russian diplomatic communications interception sound like betrayal of Bretchley Park efforts to decode enigma during WWII.

In other words, some damned traitors in Washington have just told the enemy that their top secret communications have been cracked. Its a bit like the BBC broadcasting during WWII that German enigma machine/ code has been cracked.

If true, huge advantage, considerable amount of money and efforts of NSA (as well taxpayers money) just disappeared in thin air.

And today's electronic cipher gear is much more sophisticated than in the era of Enigma, and, therefore, the loss is so much greater.

See Colonel Lang discussion at

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/05/httpwwwcnncom20170530politicsrussians-trump-campaign-information.html

ilsm - , June 04, 2017 at 08:15 AM
"seasoned military commanders" are like the Nazis who said US lost Vietnam because they were not patient. These "seasoned military commanders" seek only not to lose!

While why should anyone "follow US leadership with these type of "seasoned military commanders"?

Iran and Pakistan without US meddling will stabilize the place enough to link to OBOR.

The US is trying to prove you can kill enough of them to solve their problems, for them!

RGC - , June 04, 2017 at 10:13 AM
Neocons: The 'Anti-Realists'
January 17, 2015

America's neocons, who wield great power inside the U.S. government and media, endanger the planet by concoctingstrategies inside their heads that ignorereal-world consequences.

Thus, their"regime changes" have unleashed ancient hatreds and spread chaos across the globe.

By Robert Parry

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/17/neocons-the-anti-realists/

[Jun 02, 2017] The strange death of Anglo-American liberalism

Notable quotes:
"... In short, we're less than six months into the new presidency. There's a great deal of evidence suggesting it's business as usual despite all the pre and post-election bombast and hysteria ( bombings still popular eg), a soaring stock market, and little evidence of imminent economic collapse. ..."
"... I very much doubt that America will abandon the special relationship with Britain and Europe as long as the majority of the US population can trace their ancestry back across the Atlantic. I also think this special relationship post 1945 was a consequence of a particular set of realities, realities that have changed, and was always less robust than politicians claimed. ..."
"... it seems to me that Germany's ability to export into Britain and the US are far more critical to US-German relations than any of the gases rising out of the swamp. ..."
"... The US has evidently elected to end any efforts to destabilize pro-Russia governments in eastern Europe, which seems to me wise. ..."
"... My sense is that a considerable number of Americans would be extremely reluctant to commit US lives to protecting NATO members that currently do not meet their commitments in troops and cash. ..."
"... The core request from France and southern countries is not that Germans spend more. It's that they themselves (or at least their governments) can spend more, with the resulting debt directly or indirectly backed by the Euro-system as a whole. ..."
"... And despite German resistance, France and southern Europe are still running significant deficits, with a growing debt, while the ECB buys more of their bonds than the Germans would prefer. Ironically, both the German government and the others like to pretend that Germany has more dominance than it has. The Germans get to look in charge, the other get a scapegoat. ..."
"... Macron, on the other hand, explicitly and openly campaigned on a platform of reduction of public spending, reduction of budget deficit, lowering production costs, increasing productivity and betting that the relative internal devaluation compared to Germany will rebuild its productive capacity. ..."
Jun 02, 2017 | crookedtimber.org

by Henry on May 31, 2017 I've been thinking about this Gideon Rachman piece over the last 24 hours:

despite her cautious phrasing, Ms Merkel has also behaved irresponsibly - making a statement that threatens to widen a dangerous rift in the Atlantic alliance into a permanent breach. it is a mistake to allow four months of the Trump presidency to throw into doubt a Transatlantic alliance that has kept the peace in Europe for 70 years Ms Merkel was unwise and unfair to bracket the UK with Trump's America. In the climate change discussions, Britain sided with the EU - not the US. if Ms Merkel's government pursues the Brexit negotiations in the current confrontational spirit - demanding that the UK commit to vast upfront payments, before even discussing a trade deal - she risks creating a self-fulfilling prophecy and a lasting antagonism between Britain and the EU. It is hard to see how the UK can be expected to see the same countries as adversaries in the Brexit negotiations and allies in the Nato context. So a really hard Brexit could indeed raise questions about Britain's commitment to Nato - particularly if the US is also pulling back from the western alliance.

Not so much the broader argument (which I disagree with , but in obvious ways) than what the specifics say about the current state of Financial Times [neo]liberalism.

For a very long time, the Financial Times had a pretty clear position in debate. It was the organ that made Britain's case in Europe, and Europe's case in Britain. That went along with a certain style of argument. Committed to free markets, but with a undertone that they had to have decent outcomes. Pro concerted action to solve international problems such as global warming. Very much in favor of Europe's role in helping to cement democracy in Eastern Europe and always ready to deplore backsliding and corruption. Broadly in favor of small-l [neo]liberalism with respect to the more dubious authoritarian tendencies of both British and continental states. Economic inequality was always a dicey set of issues for a newspaper whose financial model depended in part on the "How to Spend It" supplement. Perhaps that helps explain the Chris Giles on Piketty farrago . But still, on most issues, there was a reasonably well-defined possibility space of vaguely-left liberal to vaguely-right liberal positions, triangulating between European and UK perspectives, from which FT writers (and readers) could draw.

... ... ...

engels 05.31.17 at 8:43 pm ( 4 )
Committed to free markets, but with a undertone that they had to have decent outcomes.

That's a bit like being committed to golden mountains or round squares.

kidneystones 05.31.17 at 9:39 pm ( 6 )
Hi Henry, thanks for this. A couple of thoughts.

First, I've little argument with your general remarks regarding the move away from a [neo]liberalism of the past and the likely trajectory of the FT. I'm surprised, however, by your (apparent?) willingness to plant your flag in what looks to me to be thin air. Namely, 'reports' of discord and 'crazed' arguments from the right.

I'm not sure the right and the left ever had entirely coherent arguments and I'll certainly conceded it's easier to see the crazy in Trump's flip-flop tweets, for example. I'd strongly caution reading too much into reports in the FT about words, however.

The recent Kennedy school study of coverage of the administration confirms a highly atypical manner of reporting that is often at odds with realities. I'm certainly not defending any partisan, or position (at least, here), but rather stressing that there's rarely been a worse time to parse reality from press reports for reasons that are too obvious to detail again.

A number of IR observers (including those hostile to the new president) praised the Saudi trip and the administrations relations with both Japan and China. Hostile commentary of both Trump and Merkel re: Germany, including the FT report, make clear that there are merits in Trump's critique of NATO member contributions, for example.

In short, we're less than six months into the new presidency. There's a great deal of evidence suggesting it's business as usual despite all the pre and post-election bombast and hysteria ( bombings still popular eg), a soaring stock market, and little evidence of imminent economic collapse.

I very much doubt that America will abandon the special relationship with Britain and Europe as long as the majority of the US population can trace their ancestry back across the Atlantic. I also think this special relationship post 1945 was a consequence of a particular set of realities, realities that have changed, and was always less robust than politicians claimed.

You know far more about markets and international trade than I, but it seems to me that Germany's ability to export into Britain and the US are far more critical to US-German relations than any of the gases rising out of the swamp.

The US has evidently elected to end any efforts to destabilize pro-Russia governments in eastern Europe, which seems to me wise. There's a great deal of posturing by those who have constituencies that love posturing, but beyond that very little has changed, despite the concerted effort by concerned parties (not you) to make recent events 'truly exceptional' and 'unprecedented.'

Z 06.01.17 at 11:23 am ( 12 )
A very interesting post. Two observations, of differing nature.

1) I think part of the current confusion is that the term liberalism, especially of the Anglo-American variety, has come to describe two overlapping but significantly distinct phenomena.

I think that what Henry is observing can be recast in the following terms: the countries in which liberalism have been the strongest in the first sense and in the second sense have been broadly the same during the 1800-1990 period, but that is increasingly not true anymore.

2) The paragraph starting with "This has interesting, but complicated implications for the continent" in the OP is fascinating. At the risk of being blunt, I personally believe that the current emerging political and ideological system on the European continent triggered by Brexit and Trump and led by Merkel is not correctly described as "European integration" in the sense given to this term in the 1970s or 1980s: Germany is far too powerful relative to other actors; it has by now become an almost pure system of domination.

This system of domination is not based on liberal values in the first sense above; rather the converse in fact. Arguably, it is not even based on liberal principles in the second sense: it would make good economic sense for Germans, French and the rest of European people if Germany agreed to raise very significantly its wages and to consume more yet, as Henry mentions in the linked piece at the Monkey Cage, there are considerably resistance coming from Germany as long as France (or Spain, or Italy, or of course Greece) has not learned "discipline" or "responsibility".

In particular, even though Macron and his electorate embody liberalism in the second sense almost as perfectly as was ever achieved in an advanced democracy (and despite his apparent sincere personal adherence to some form of philosophical liberalism in the first sense), he and his government might very well end up being drawn in an endless spiral of increasing austerity and higher unemployment in the (vain?) hope to become more than the national relay of German power in France (a very balanced but thorough analysis can be read here https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/economie/180517/le-soutien-de-lallemagne-indispensable-au-projet-macron?onglet=full ).

kidneystones 06.01.17 at 1:59 pm ( 14 )
@10 Thank you for this. I fear you misunderstand me. My own view is that the 'special relationship' that is so much in danger is and has been a fiction.

The US did not ride to the rescue in 1914, or 1939. From 1945 until 1992 (or so) the US engaged in a world wide war against communism. NATO never had a conventional armed force to match that of the eastern bloc and the Soviet Union. A convincing case can be made that Turkey is/was far more important to the US military alliance than any nation in Europe.

My sense is that a considerable number of Americans would be extremely reluctant to commit US lives to protecting NATO members that currently do not meet their commitments in troops and cash. Both WWI and WWII offer scant evidence that Americans are likely to feel any urgent need to rush Europe's defense unless the case can be made that American interests are actually threatened. I say that as a supporter of NATO who is not American.

I can say that last time so many Americans were convinced they were living in extraordinary times you ended up invading Iraq. The pages of the NYT have been filled with the kind of conspiracy tales that one can find easily in the comments section of Free Republic and Breitbart. The media and politicians rush to fit the enemy with a crime. The fact that Feinstein and others stress they have seen no evidence of any crime means nothing. Like Bush and Cheney, these folks aren't interested in facts, the political WMD must there somewhere, so 'we' have no alternative but to invade/invalidate the election.

What you and your LARGE CAP pals fail to grasp is that the mountain of evidence growing larger every day accurately reflects the scale of the current president's success. The establishment of both political parties and the media, the defeated candidate and the former president still expend unprecedented levels of energy, cash, and political capitol trying to slow down a geriatric political neophyte who has somehow tied the oh so much smarter elites in knots.

The net result of which is to confirm for the historical record that no other president has faced and overcome opposition from the establishment on this scale. He could yet implode, but as someone once noted 'hope is not a plan.'

Worth reading – especially the part about the Dem message getting lost in the white noise.
https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/

James 06.01.17 at 2:52 pm ( 15 )
Its interesting that the reader comments under FT articles have never been very supportive of Theresa May, and in the last two weeks have turned viciously against her. The number of pro-Corbyn comments is surprising.
Zamfir 06.01.17 at 2:56 pm ( 16 )
Z writes:
- Arguably, it is not even based on liberal principles in the second sense: it would make good economic sense for Germans, French and the rest of European people if Germany agreed to raise very significantly its wages and to consume more yet, as Henry mentions in the linked piece at the Monkey Cage, there are considerably resistance coming from Germany as long as France (or Spain, or Italy, or of course Greece) has not learned "discipline" or "responsibility" -

The core request from France and southern countries is not that Germans spend more. It's that they themselves (or at least their governments) can spend more, with the resulting debt directly or indirectly backed by the Euro-system as a whole. It's not that obvious to me that this makes good economic sense for everyone, win-win-win. If that deficit spending works as intended, it's good for the spending countries and neutral for Germany. If it doesn't work, it's bad for Germany but neutral for the spending countries (who at least got the spending, even if it doesn't kick-start the wider economy).

And despite German resistance, France and southern Europe are still running significant deficits, with a growing debt, while the ECB buys more of their bonds than the Germans would prefer. Ironically, both the German government and the others like to pretend that Germany has more dominance than it has. The Germans get to look in charge, the other get a scapegoat.

Z 06.01.17 at 5:06 pm ( 17 )
The core request from France and southern countries is not that Germans spend more. It's that they themselves (or at least their governments) can spend more, with the resulting debt directly or indirectly backed by the Euro-system as a whole.

No, no, really no, not in the case of Macron, what you describe would have been the official Hollande position before he abandoned it in late 2012/early 2013 or the platform of Benoît Hamon (the unsuccessful presidential candidate from the Party Socialiste).

Macron, on the other hand, explicitly and openly campaigned on a platform of reduction of public spending, reduction of budget deficit, lowering production costs, increasing productivity and betting that the relative internal devaluation compared to Germany will rebuild its productive capacity. What it asks in Germany in exchange is that it diminishes its trade surplus, raises its wages and have a sustained growth of its internal demand, so that the productivity differential between the two economies (which would normally be corrected by an appreciation of the German currency) be reduced. Echoes from Germany say that German leaders (though not necessarily Merkel) want Macron to prove that he is serious about his side of the plan before they do their part and echoes from the Élysée say that he agreed, which is risky as only quite intense austerity policies can reduce said productivity differential unilaterally and such policies in contemporary France, with its already very low demand, high unemployment and dynamic demography, may lead to an explosive socio-economic situation.

[Jun 02, 2017] The Dishonorable White House Leaks

Jun 02, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Conservative writer Erick Erickson said he knows one of the White House sources who has leaked information critical of President Trump. Erickson said on FOX News on May 16 that "more and more White House sources are leaking to the press so that the president does get the memo people in the White House are trying to get the president's attention." Erickson said this is "not intentional sabotage." He said the person he knows who is leaking is a Trump supporter who is frustrated with President Trump.

Since Erickson said this the leaks from anonymous sources in the White House have, if anything, increased. Now White House communications director Mike Dubke has resigned and it doesn't seem a big leap to assume the issues are related-we shouldn't have to wait long for leaks from the White House to tell us.

At the root of all of this is me-generation, inside-the-beltway-style thinking, as leaks designed to "get the president's attention" don't just publicly showcase a lack of loyalty from White House staff, but they actually expose a complete lack of honor in those doing the leaking. It's hard not to wonder if these leakers even understand what real honor is.

When those on the inside of an embattled administration empower themselves by trying to check their boss (in this case the president of the United States) not from within their chain of command, as they rightly can, but by anonymously leaking information to the media, then what we have is mutinous conduct. That is only honorable in one extreme circumstance.

Before getting to that, it should be said anyone who has spent a good deal of time inside the Beltway has likely been exposed to an unhealthy dose of Machiavellianism. Anyone who has spent a career in Washington, D.C.'s political circus might have a hard time clearly comprehending, much less believing in, real honor. I've even had some who live and work inside the Beltway tell me honor is a quality they can't afford, as others won't play by gentlemanly rules.

Journalists with that point of view can only do so much damage, but officials with that view can sink a presidency.

Now sure, a good argument could even be made that journalists should be circling sharks who feel most emboldened when there is some blood in the water. And that might be a sound basis for an argument if the Washington media went after Democrats with the same zeal it does Republican administrations.

But whatever we think of journalists, any reasonable person will likely agree that when someone takes a staff position in an administration they are agreeing to support the administration. To accomplish this, instead of trashing their boss and hierarchy in the media, those within an administration would be wiser to come to an understanding of what real honor is, or, if they are not happy with what they signed on for, to leave the administration in protest.

So okay, what is honorable? Dictionary.com begins defining "honor" as "honesty, fairness, or integrity in one's beliefs and actions." That's a fine start, but honor is much more than those lofty words. For a more practical understanding of honor, it is helps to look at the actions of those who've misunderstood it.

Edward Snowden is a good example of a person who showed he didn't understand honor. Hopefully being stuck in Russia's cold embrace has taught him what he clearly didn't know-though, based on his Tweets, it hasn't.

Some on the right and the left consider what Snowden did to be honorable, even heroic, because they like that he checked Big Brother. I like that, too. (I even have a soon-to-be-released novel coming out called Kill Big Brother that shows how to get it done right.) But the thing is Snowden wasn't courageous enough to do the real honorable thing. If he took his information on government invasions of privacy to Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who helped write the Whistleblower Protection Act and is a strong advocate for whistleblowers, or another member of Congress and let the system fight it out on the inside before, as a last resort, possibly leaking some small portion of the data to the media, then he could be called honorable from a certain and very American point of view.

But that's not what he did. According to a bipartisan report by the House Intelligence Committee, Snowden calculatingly tried to trick coworkers, sometimes successfully, into giving him their security credentials so he could access their network drives. He then copied all of the information and, finally, leaked it. According to the report the "vast majority of the documents he stole [had] nothing to do with programs impacting individual privacy interests-they instead pertain to military, defense, and intelligence programs of great interest to America's adversaries." Snowden soon fled to China and then to Russia-two nations that hardly stand up for the values he was supposed to be fighting for. And he gave those nations this secret U.S. government data.

There is little that is honorable in Snowden's actions. Chelsea Elizabeth Manning (born Bradley Edward Manning), who delivered nearly three-quarters of a million classified or sensitive military and diplomatic documents to Wikileaks, also acted dishonorably. He/she should have acted as a whistleblower, not a leaker.

Meanwhile, those now in the White House who reportedly decided to check President Trump by leaking information to the media have acted just as dishonorably.

If honor requires them to act, then it also requires them to act in an honorable way. It takes real guts to do that, especially when you realize how the U.S. government's bureaucracy treats whistleblowers-and then realize that even a congressman can't do much to help a whistleblower even as the whistleblower's career is destroyed, often by politically appointed bureaucrats who consider whistleblowers to be traitors.

The honorable, and American, way to check the system is to use its built-in checks and balances, not to hide behind anonymity while muckraking in the media. Going outside the system might be honorable if the checks and balances do not work; checking the entire system like that, however, must be a last resort in a freely elected democracy. (This is arguably what Deep Throat did.)

Those in the current administration who are uncertain about what is honorable should pick up a copy of Herman Wouk's 1951 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Caine Mutiny . Or, if they don't have the time, watch the 1954 film version starring Humphrey Bogart, Van Johnson and Fred MacMurray.

In the film version Captain Philip Francis Queeg (Humphrey Bogart) shows clear signs of paranoia as he tries to enforce discipline on the Caine 's crew. Communications officer Thomas Keefer (Fred MacMurray) soon tries to convince executive officer Stephen Maryk (Van Johnson) to consider relieving Captain Queeg on the basis of mental incapacity under Article 184 of Navy Regulations. Maryk refuses, but finally has to do so when the ship is imperiled by a storm and Captain Queeg falls apart under the pressure. The film then turns to a court-martial hearing for Maryk and others for mutiny. They win the case when Captain Queeg falls apart on the witness stand. This leaves them feeling justified, but then, later, their Navy defense attorney (Jose Ferrer), now drunk, confronts them and tells them they were wrong. He tells them they should have helped Captain Queeg along the way instead of mutinously pulling away from him until he collapsed under pressure. The honorable thing to do was to first try to help.

Honor can be a hard, subtle thing like that, especially when the boss doesn't always showcase all the traits of a man of honor.

Frank Miniter is the author of the New York Times bestseller The Ultimate Man's Survival Guide: Recovering the Lost Art of Manhood . He is also the author of This Will Make a Man of You and The Future of the Gun .

[May 31, 2017] Russian ambassador told Moscow that Kushner wanted secret communications channel with Kremlin by Ellen Nakashima, Adam Entous and Greg Miller

Another well-placed, well-timed leak from WaPo. Un-named intelligence official in play again. Is Russian embassy bugged and all diplomatic correspondence intercepted ? Looks like those guys outdid STASI. the standard question arises: "cuo bono".
If true, that means that the way information was obtained is iether already known by Russian, or this channel will be closed really soon. Form the text of the article it looks like the USA is able to read Russian diplomatic communication. Unless this is yet another disinformation, that means that the USA obtained the keys used by the embassy for incoding dypolicic communication, or have a modle who provided this communication by downloading already decoded archive or something like that. Which actually violates Vienna convention and makes the USA rogue nation not that different from GDR ot the USSR.
While it is unclear " what Kislyak would have had to gain by falsely characterizing his contacts with Kushner to Moscow" it is clear who benefit from this revelation. But even if true why to reveal such an important information for such a minor case. Trump folded. What else "deep state" wants from him ? Are Hillary friends in State Department and a couple of other intelligence agencies really crazy about the revenge ?
More questions then answers
Notable quotes:
"... But officials said that it's unclear what Kislyak would have had to gain by falsely characterizing his contacts with Kushner to Moscow, particularly at a time when the Kremlin still saw the prospect of dramatically improved relations with Trump. ..."
"... The FBI closely monitors the communications of Russian officials in the United States, and maintains near-constant surveillance of its diplomatic facilities. The National Security Agency monitors the communications of Russian officials overseas. ..."
"... 'according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports'. This isn't any sort of verification. Another manufactured news media story. ..."
"... The Washington Post should not even believed with there track record. They should identify there source that is leaking anything they can get there hands. Never about anything else accept fake news. The jokers on here keep on drinking the koolaid that the WP prints! ..."
"... Always jump to conclusions as always without the facts. They gave up on Trump now they go after some one else. You fools talk about Watergate and have no proof about any of this except what the Washington Trash prints! ..."
May 26, 2017 | www.msn.com

Jared Kushner and Russia's ambassador to Washington discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure communications channel between Trump's transition team and the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities in an apparent move to shield their pre-inauguration discussions from monitoring, according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports.

Ambassador Sergei Kislyak reported to his superiors in Moscow that Kushner, then President-elect Trump's son-in-law and confidant, made the proposal during a meeting on Dec. 1 or 2 at Trump Tower, according to intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials. Kislyak said Kushner suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States for the communications.

The meeting also was attended by Michael Flynn, Trump's first national security adviser.

The White House disclosed the fact of the meeting only in March, playing down its significance. But people familiar with the matter say the FBI now considers the encounter, as well as another meeting Kushner had with a Russian banker, to be of investigative interest.

Kislyak reportedly was taken aback by the suggestion of allowing an American to use Russian communications gear at its embassy or consulate - a proposal that would have carried security risks for Moscow as well as the Trump team.

Neither the meeting nor the communications of Americans involved were under U.S. surveillance, officials said.

The White House declined to comment. Robert Kelner, a lawyer for Flynn, declined to comment. The Russian embassy did not respond to requests for comment.

Russia at times feeds false information into communication streams it suspects are monitored as a way of sowing misinformation and confusion among U.S. analysts. But officials said that it's unclear what Kislyak would have had to gain by falsely characterizing his contacts with Kushner to Moscow, particularly at a time when the Kremlin still saw the prospect of dramatically improved relations with Trump.

Kushner's apparent interest in establishing a secret channel with Moscow, rather than rely on U.S. government systems, has added to the intrigue surrounding the Trump administration's relationship with Russia.

To some officials, it also reflects a staggering naivete.

The FBI closely monitors the communications of Russian officials in the United States, and maintains near-constant surveillance of its diplomatic facilities. The National Security Agency monitors the communications of Russian officials overseas.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that though Russian diplomats have secure means of communicating with Moscow, Kushner's apparent request for access to such channels was extraordinary.

"How would he trust that the Russians wouldn't leak it on their side?" said one former senior intelligence official. The FBI would know that a Trump transition official was going in and out of the embassy, which would cause "a great deal" of concern, he added. The entire idea, he said, "seems extremely naïve or absolutely crazy."

The discussion of a secret channel adds to a broader pattern of efforts by Trump's closest advisors to obscure their contacts with Russian counterparts. Trump's first national security adviser, Flynn, was forced to resign after a series of false statements about his conversations with Kislyak. Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from matters related to the Russia investigation after it was revealed that he had failed to disclose his own meetings with Kislyak when asked during congressional testimony about any contact with Russians.

Kushner's interactions with Russians - including Kislyak and an executive for a Russian bank under U.S. sanctions - were not acknowledged by the White House until they were exposed in media reports.

It is common for senior advisers of a newly elected president to be in contact with foreign leaders and officials. But new administrations are generally cautious in their handling of interactions with Moscow, which U.S. intelligence

... ... ....

In addition to their discussion about setting up the communications channel, Kushner, Flynn and Kislyak also talked about arranging a meeting between a representative of Trump and a "Russian contact" in a third country whose name was not identified, according to the anonymous letter.

The Post reported in April that Erik Prince, the former founder of Blackwater private security firm and an informal adviser to the Trump transition team, met on Jan. 11 - nine days before Trump's inauguration - in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean with a representative of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Tom Lewis · Longs, South Carolina

"Jared Kushner and Russia's ambassador to Washington discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure communications channel between Trump's transition team and the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities in an apparent move to shield their pre-inauguration discussions from monitoring" .... pretty stiff accusation with this as the news media's source ... 'according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports'. This isn't any sort of verification. Another manufactured news media story.

Paul Schofield · San Diego, California

Everyone knew about this, and it happens with every transition team, and it was done AFTER Trump won the election, but if it gets the Liberals' panties in a bunch, and CNN more viewers, the angry Clintonites can scream impeachment for a few hours tonight..... suckers!

Jerry Reich · Arnold, Missouri

The Washington Post should not even believed with there track record. They should identify there source that is leaking anything they can get there hands. Never about anything else accept fake news. The jokers on here keep on drinking the koolaid that the WP prints!

Always jump to conclusions as always without the facts. They gave up on Trump now they go after some one else. You fools talk about Watergate and have no proof about any of this except what the Washington Trash prints!

[May 30, 2017] What Did John Brennan and Anonymous Sources Really Say - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... The Washington Post ..."
"... inter alia ..."
"... At a later point in his testimony Brennan also said that "I had unresolved questions in my mind about whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting U.S. persons, involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion," clearly meant to imply that some friends of Trump might have become Russian agents voluntarily but others might have cooperated without knowing it. ..."
"... a line that has surfaced elsewhere previously, most notably in the demented meanderings of former acting Director of Central Intelligence Michael Morell. As the purpose of recruiting an intelligence agent is to have a resource that can be directed to do things for you, the statement is an absurdity and Brennan and Morell, as a former Director and acting Director of the CIA, should know better. ..."
"... In his testimony, Brennan also hit the main theme that appears to be accepted by nearly everyone inside the beltway, namely that Russian sought to influence and even pervert the outcome of the 2016 election. Interpreting his testimony, the Post article asserts that "Russia was engaged in an 'aggressive' and 'multifaceted 'effort to interfere in our election." As has been noted frequently before, even though this assertion has apparently been endorsed by nearly everyone in the power structure AKA (also known as) "those who matter," it is singularly lacking in any actual evidence. ..."
"... Last Wednesday, the New York Times ..."
"... It would appear that the New York Times ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... The end result of Brennan's fulminations likely is nuclear war, since he seems to consider even contact with the Russians treasonous. His view is both fascist and nihilist and treasonous to civilization itself and a threat to our survival. ..."
"... As Russia is seen by them as the next country to be subjugated, any talk with this 'enemy' to them is high treason. ..."
"... Mr. Clapper finally found the answer to this 1 billion dollar question why US is suffering in his NBC interview -- it is because Russians are untermensch. Russian genetics is wrong and we all were so sweating and suffering over this whole mess., while the answer was so close, on the surface. ..."
"... "If you put that in context with everything else we knew the Russians were doing to interfere with the election, and just the historical practices of the Russians, who typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique. So we were concerned." ..."
"... This is a fact showing the US' direct meddling in the affairs of another state and in creating a war on a border with Russian federation. Brennan has been so much immersed in lies and politicking and war crimes that it is impossible to expect any decent reasoning from this miserable opportunist. ..."
"... What Goering did say – cogently and precisely – is that, regardless of the form of government, the people can always be quite easily stirred up to want war. The key sentence is this: "All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger". That is exactly what the US, UK and European governments have been doing for years to justify their terrorist scares and their wars of aggression. And Goering was absolutely right to point out that it works just the same in democracies (or "democracies") as under dictatorships. ..."
"... "Apparently we need to focus on protecting our vote from our own government". I very much doubt if the Deep State needs to resort to such small-scale and easily-detected trickery to retain control. As Philip Berrigan pointed out long ago, "If voting made any difference, it would be illegal". ..."
May 30, 2017 | www.unz.com
The Washington Post and a number of other mainstream media outlets are sensing blood in the water in the wake of former CIA Director John Brennan's public testimony before the House Intelligence Committee. The Post headlined a front page featured article with Brennan's explosive testimony just made it harder for the GOP to protect Trump . The article states that Brennan during the 2016 campaign "reviewed intelligence that showed 'contacts and interaction' between Russian actors and people associated with the Trump campaign." Politico was also in on the chase in an article entitled Brennan: Russia may have successfully recruited Trump campaign aides .

The precise money quote by Brennan that the two articles chiefly rely on is "I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and US persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised questions in my mind whether or not Russia was able to gain the co-operation of those individuals."

Now first of all, the CIA is not supposed to keep tabs on American citizens and tracking the activities of known associates of a presidential candidate should have sent warning bells off, yet Brennan clearly persisted in following the trail. What Brennan did not describe, because it was "classified," was how he came upon the information in the first place. We know from the New York Times and other sources that it came from foreign intelligence services, including the British, Dutch and Estonians, and there has to be a strong suspicion that the forwarding of at least some of that information might have been sought or possibly inspired by Brennan unofficially in the first place. But whatever the provenance of the intelligence, it is clear that Brennan then used that information to request an FBI investigation into a possible Russian operation directed against potential key advisers if Trump were to somehow get nominated and elected, which admittedly was a longshot at the time. That is how Russiagate began.

But where the information ultimately came from as well as its reliability is just speculation as the source documents have not been made public. What is not speculative is what Brennan actually said in his testimony. He said that Americans associated with Trump and his campaign had met with Russians. He was "concerned" because of known Russian efforts to "suborn such individuals." Note that Brennan, presumably deliberately, did not say "suborn those individuals." Sure, Russian intelligence (and CIA, MI-6, and Mossad as well as a host of others) seek to recruit people with access to politically useful information. That is what they do for a living, but Brennan is not saying that he has or saw any evidence that that was the case with the Trump associates. He is speaking generically of "such individuals" because he knows that spies, inter alia , recruit politicians and the Russians presumably, like the Americans and British, do so aggressively.

At a later point in his testimony Brennan also said that "I had unresolved questions in my mind about whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting U.S. persons, involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion," clearly meant to imply that some friends of Trump might have become Russian agents voluntarily but others might have cooperated without knowing it. It is a line that has surfaced elsewhere previously, most notably in the demented meanderings of former acting Director of Central Intelligence Michael Morell. As the purpose of recruiting an intelligence agent is to have a resource that can be directed to do things for you, the statement is an absurdity and Brennan and Morell, as a former Director and acting Director of the CIA, should know better. That they don't explains a lot of things about today's CIA.

Brennan confirms his lack of any hard evidence when he also poses the question "whether or not Russia was able to gain the co-operation of those individuals." He doesn't know whether the Americans were approached and asked to cooperate by Russian intelligence officers and, even if they were, he does not know whether they agreed to do so. That means that the Americans in question were guilty only of meeting and talking to Russians, which was presumably enough to open an FBI investigation. One might well consider that at the time and even to this day Russia was not and is not a declared enemy of the United States and meeting Russians is not a criminal offense.

In his testimony, Brennan also hit the main theme that appears to be accepted by nearly everyone inside the beltway, namely that Russian sought to influence and even pervert the outcome of the 2016 election. Interpreting his testimony, the Post article asserts that "Russia was engaged in an 'aggressive' and 'multifaceted 'effort to interfere in our election." As has been noted frequently before, even though this assertion has apparently been endorsed by nearly everyone in the power structure AKA (also known as) "those who matter," it is singularly lacking in any actual evidence.

Nor has any evidence been produced to support the claim that it was Russia that hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) server, which now is accepted as Gospel, but that is just one side to the story being promoted. Last Wednesday, the New York Times led off its front page with a piece entitled Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer . Based, as always, on anonymous sources citing "highly classified" intelligence, the article claimed that "American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers " The "discussions," which are presumably NSA intercepts of phone calls, reportedly focused on two aides in particular, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn, both of whom had established relationships with Russian businessmen and government officials.

The article goes on to concede that "It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn ," and that's about all there is to the tale, though the Times wanders on for another three pages, recapping Brennan and the Flynn saga lest anyone has forgotten. So what do we have? Russians were talking on the phone about the possibility of influencing an American's presidential candidate's advisers, an observation alluded to by Brennan and also revealed in somewhat more detail by anonymous sources. Pretty thin gruel, isn't it? Isn't that what diplomats and intelligence officers do?

It would appear that the New York Times ' editors are unaware that the United States routinely interferes in elections worldwide and that the action taken in various places including Ukraine goes far beyond phone conversations. In some other places like Libya, Syria, Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan the interference is particularly robust taking place at the point of a bayonet, but the Times and Washington Post don't appear to have any problem when the regime change is being accomplished ostensibly to make the world more democratic, even if it almost never has that result.

How one regards all of the dreck coming out of the Fourth Estate and poseurs like John Brennan pretty much depends on the extent one is willing to trust that what the government, its highly-politicized bureaucrats and the media tell the public is true. For me, that would be not a lot. The desire to bring down the buffoonish Donald Trump is understandable, but buying into government and media lies will only lead to more lies that have real consequences, up to and including the impending wars against North Korea and Iran. It is imperative that every American should question everything he or she reads in a newspaper, sees on television "news" or hears coming out of the mouths of former and current government employees.

RobinG , May 30, 2017 at 5:20 am GMT

Thanks for the reassurance, Phil. It's lonely standing against the tide, and many are trying to fabricate excuses for the lack of evidence.

Take Melvin Goodman, author of Whistleblower at the CIA, for instance. (I realize CIA is a big place, but did you know him?) I've met Mr. Goodman, and he struck me as thoughtful, rational and capable of objective discussion. However, in his talk at the Gaithersburg Book Festival, he seemed a rather different person. At the end of Q&A, he said that he was trying to figure out how the Russians had laundered the "hacked" DNC emails to make it look like they were leaked by an insider. He's sure the Russians did it. With such creative speculation, who needs facts?

The book, though, is probably pretty good. Which makes it that much stranger that he's taking the political line on the DNC emails!

https://www.c-span.org/video/?427995-3/whistleblower-cia

Melvin A. Goodman talked about his book, Whistleblower at the CIA: An Insider's Account of the Politics of Intelligence.

animalogic , May 30, 2017 at 5:32 am GMT

Ah, another day, another disgraceful display by the media. Incidentally: "The "discussions," which are presumably NSA intercepts of phone calls, reportedly ."
"Presumably" here is quite generous: I'd be tempted to presume a whole string of lies .

Anon , May 30, 2017 at 5:51 am GMT

US is now like USSR?

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2017/05/29/forget-russian-collusion-we-are-russia/

The Alarmist , May 30, 2017 at 5:54 am GMT

It's like climate change: The MSM tells us that 17 intelligence agencies agree that the Russians hacked the election and thereby influenced it, but when you dig a little you find that NSA, for example, did not express a high degree of confidence that this might have actually been the case. Nevertheless, the case is settled. Pravda and Izvestia should have been so convinced in their day.

exiled off mainstreet , May 30, 2017 at 6:15 am GMT

The end result of Brennan's fulminations likely is nuclear war, since he seems to consider even contact with the Russians treasonous. His view is both fascist and nihilist and treasonous to civilization itself and a threat to our survival.

jilles dykstra , May 30, 2017 at 8:00 am GMT

It all seems quite simple to me. After WWI the USA people decided that their sons should not die ever more for imperialism. Isolation, neutrality laws.

In 1932 Roosevelt was brought into politics to make the USA great, great as the country controlling the world. Trump and his rich friends understand that this policy is not just ruining the USA, but is ruining them personally. If I'm right in this, it is the greatest change in USA foreign policy since 1932.

Of course those, their mouth pieces Washpost, CNN and NYT, who still want USA control of the world, have aligned their careers on this policy, do anything to get rid of Trump. As Russia is seen by them as the next country to be subjugated, any talk with this 'enemy' to them is high treason.

Russ , May 30, 2017 at 8:39 am GMT

Lisa Frank has recently (5/18/2017) written beautifully on the topic of Comey in the FBI: http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=72788

Just as Ms. Frank dissects Comey's background and motivations, so a similar dissection is now in order for Mr. Brennan.

LauraMR , May 30, 2017 at 9:32 am GMT

@exiled off mainstreet The end result of Brennan's fulminations likely is nuclear war, since he seems to consider even contact with the Russians treasonous. His view is both fascist and nihilist and treasonous to civilization itself and a threat to our survival.

Is he an Anglo-Zionist? I kind of missed a reference to the true puppet-masters in the article

Renoman , May 30, 2017 at 10:08 am GMT

I'll say it again "what has Russia ever done to the USA"? The answer is Nothing!

mp , May 30, 2017 at 10:30 am GMT

Is someone going to look in to how the Izzys influence our politicians and elections? No. Why? Because Russia is the "enemy" and Israel is our "ally." Can someone explain in simple terms why Russia is the enemy? Yes. Because Jews don't like them very much. Can someone explain in simple terms why Israel is our ally? Because of New York City, Hollywood, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, CBS and NBC, the major newspapers, Wall Street, porn, military subsidies, dual citizenship, etc. And because every president just can't wait to wear the beanie and genuflect at some wall. Any other questions?

Tom Welsh , May 30, 2017 at 10:52 am GMT

" One might well consider that at the time and even to this day Russia was not and is not a declared enemy of the United States and meeting Russians is not a criminal offense".

Although in point of fact the USA has committed, and continues to commit, acts of war against Russia.

Tom Welsh , May 30, 2017 at 10:53 am GMT

@Renoman "[W]hat has Russia ever done to the USA"?

Er, supported the US government during the American Civil War? Given it Alaska for a token payment? Won WW2 for it?

RealAmerican , May 30, 2017 at 11:23 am GMT

How many congressmen and other politicians in Washington are already suborned by AIPAC? Is that not AIPAC's raison d'etre ?

DanCT , May 30, 2017 at 11:33 am GMT

"Because of New York City, Hollywood, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, CBS and NBC, the major newspapers, Wall Street, porn, military subsidies, dual citizenship, etc. "

Let's not forget 911 and it's ongoing coverup, the State Dept's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs exemplifying our bestest ally's parallel command and control apparatus in every federal agency such as the FBI, etc

Wizard of Oz , May 30, 2017 at 12:30 pm GMT

The only problem I have with the article is understanding the vehemence with which Brennan and Morell are denounced for, as I read it, blathering about unwitting agents who might have co-operated without knowing it. I construed the objection to be based on a foreign intelligence service necessarily seeking to "direct" its agents. It would indeed follow that the agents could not help knowing what they were doing. However .

Is there not a category of people who Brennan and Morell might be referring to who could be aptly described as useful idiots. You meet them at a writer's festival, invite them to accept your country's generous and admiring hospitality and soon have them spouting the memes you have made sure they are fed as well inadvertently feeding you useful titbits of information, especially about people.

alexander , May 30, 2017 at 12:31 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh

I think something fascinating is going on, Tom. Our leaders made a choice to defraud us into the Iraq war. Russia didn't. This is a very serious crime for which there has been zero accountability. It seems that all the various people who should be in federal prison for having done this, are the one's "braying the loudest" about the Russian threat.

The real crisis in our country is the absence of accountability for the heinous crimes THEY committed, not anything the Russians did. If we allow acts of "war fraud" to go unprosecuted, then War Fraud becomes acceptable behavior. I do not know of one American, anywhere, who feels this is okay.

Do you ?

Andrei Martyanov , Website May 30, 2017 at 12:50 pm GMT

Nor has any evidence been produced to support the claim that it was Russia that hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) server

It doesn't matter. Mr. Clapper finally found the answer to this 1 billion dollar question why US is suffering in his NBC interview -- it is because Russians are untermensch. Russian genetics is wrong and we all were so sweating and suffering over this whole mess., while the answer was so close, on the surface.

"If you put that in context with everything else we knew the Russians were doing to interfere with the election, and just the historical practices of the Russians, who typically, almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever, which is a typical Russian technique. So we were concerned."

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/james-clapper-trump-russia-ties-my-dashboard-warning-light-was-n765601

Agent76 , May 30, 2017 at 1:19 pm GMT

I know some others actually know you cannot believe spies. Some on the other hand so not.

Mar 22, 2017 How the CIA Plants News Stories in the Media. It is no longer disputed that the CIA has maintained an extensive and ongoing relationship with news organizations and journalists, and multiple, specific acts of media manipulation have now been documented.

August 30, 2015 THE CIA AND THE MEDIA: 50 FACTS THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW By Prof. James F. Tracy

Since the end of World War Two the Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in US and foreign news media, exerting considerable influence over what the public sees, hears and reads on a regular basis.

https://www.intellihub.com/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know-2/ 

Tom Welsh , May 30, 2017 at 1:53 pm GMT

@alexander Alexander, I definitely don't think it's OK, but I am not American – I am British (Scottish, to be exact). Although we have exactly the same problem over here – in miniature – with our local pocket Hitlers strutting around in their jackboots just salivating for the blood of foreigners.

I think the people who are braying about Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. are doing so largely to distract attention from their own crimes. The following celebrated dialogue explains very clearly how it works.

-------------------------------------–
We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

- Conversation with Hermann Goering in prison, reported by Gustave Gilbert

jilles dykstra , May 30, 2017 at 2:23 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh I suppose the story is meant to show that Goering wanted war. The opposite is true, he sent the Swedish negotiator Dahlerus several times to London in his plane, taking himself care, telephoning with the Dutch authorities, that the Junckers could fly safely over the Netherlands. What Goering did not know was that Britain had been preparing for war at least since 1936. The march 1939 guarantee to Poland was meant to provoke Hitler to attack Poland. The trap worked.

jilles dykstra , May 30, 2017 at 2:29 pm GMT

@Agent76 That even Senator Moynihan, of the CIA Oversight Committee, was lied to by the CIA director, about laying mines in Havana harbour, says enough. The CIA is not a secret service, it is a secret army. This secret army began drugs production in Afghanistan, mainly for the USA market, when funds for the CIA's war in Afghanistan were insufficient.

Agent76 , May 30, 2017 at 2:32 pm GMT

This CIA director? May 19, 2010 Obama advisor John Brennan speaks about the beauty of Islam

jilles dykstra , May 30, 2017 at 2:34 pm GMT

@alexander It is.
After an investigation of some seven years the lies of Tony Blair were exposed, in a report of considerable size. What happened ? Nothing. Instead of being in jail, the man flies aroud in a private jet, with an enormous income, paid by whom for what, I do not have a clue.

Agent76 , May 30, 2017 at 2:43 pm GMT

Dec 12, 2016 Georgia Official Says Homeland Security Tried To Hack Their State's Voter Database

While most of the country frets over Russia's role in the 2016 election, the state of Georgia has come forward saying that they've traced an IP from a hack of their voter database right back to the offices of the Department of Homeland Security. Apparently we need to focus on protecting our vote from our own government.

annamaria , May 30, 2017 at 2:50 pm GMT

@exiled off mainstreet

The end result of Brennan's fulminations likely is nuclear war, since he seems to consider even contact with the Russians treasonous. His view is both fascist and nihilist and treasonous to civilization itself and a threat to our survival. Brennan is just a regular profiteering opportunist. Someone needs to remind the scoundrel that the civil war in Ukraine (initiated by an illegal Kievan junta sponsored and installed by the US), had started immediately upon Brennan's arrival to Kiev in 2014. He tried to make the visit secret but this did not work and Brennan's presence in Ukraine became widely known: https://sputniknews.com/world/20140415189240842-ANALYSIS-CIA-Director-Brennans-Trip-to-Ukraine-Initiates-Use-Of/

"CIA Director John Brennan visited Ukraine over the weekend, information that was confirmed by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Monday, after being reported by media on Sunday.

Over the same weekend, Kiev authorities cracked down on pro-federalization protests in eastern Ukraine. Regime troops advanced toward a number of cities in eastern Ukraine Tuesday to attack the protesters. "Brennan's appearance in Kiev just before the announcement of a violent crackdown in eastern Ukraine is just too timely to assume that it is a coincidence," Turbeville [an American international affairs expert] said.

"Brennan, who has been actively involved in arming insurgents in Libya, Syria and Venezuela, has a reputation for using thuggish tactics in pursuit of CIA goals," Wayne Madsen, an American investigative journalist told RIA Novosti."

This is a fact showing the US' direct meddling in the affairs of another state and in creating a war on a border with Russian federation. Brennan has been so much immersed in lies and politicking and war crimes that it is impossible to expect any decent reasoning from this miserable opportunist.

alexander , May 30, 2017 at 2:58 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh Excellent quote, Tom.

.And so true.

Agent76 , May 30, 2017 at 3:08 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

Unfortunately for you and myself there are literally millions of people in America who do not think or challenge what they read or view as we do apparently. Thanks, *government schooling* .

Mar 6, 2017 Drug Boss Escobar Worked for the CIA

The notorious cocaine kingpin Pablo Escobar worked closely with the CIA, according to his son. In this episode of The Geopolitical Report, we look at the long history of CIA involvement in the international narcotics trade, beginning with its collaboration with the French Mafia to using drug money to illegally fund the Contras and overthrow the Sandinista government in Nicaragua.

Tom Welsh , May 30, 2017 at 3:29 pm GMT

@jilles dykstra

I suppose the story is meant to show that Goering wanted war. The opposite is true, he sent the Swedish negotiator Dahlerus several times to London in his plane, taking himself care, telephoning with the Dutch authorities, that the Junckers could fly safely over the Netherlands. What Goering did not know was that Britain had been preparing for war at least since 1936. The march 1939 guarantee to Poland was meant to provoke Hitler to attack Poland. The trap worked.

What Goering did say – cogently and precisely – is that, regardless of the form of government, the people can always be quite easily stirred up to want war. The key sentence is this: "All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger". That is exactly what the US, UK and European governments have been doing for years to justify their terrorist scares and their wars of aggression. And Goering was absolutely right to point out that it works just the same in democracies (or "democracies") as under dictatorships.

As for your point about Britain having deliberately fomented the war, I don't think that holds water. Britain was grossly – almost grotesquely – underarmed in 1939, and came very close indeed to being conquered in 1940. In my view, it was FDR and his friends who assiduously wound up the Nazis and the Poles to fight one another, and then persuaded the British and French to give Poland guarantees. Everyone believed that, if war came, the USA would immediately join Britain and France in fighting Germany. Alas, they were very much mistaken.

Tom Welsh , May 30, 2017 at 3:31 pm GMT

@Agent76 "

"Apparently we need to focus on protecting our vote from our own government". I very much doubt if the Deep State needs to resort to such small-scale and easily-detected trickery to retain control. As Philip Berrigan pointed out long ago, "If voting made any difference, it would be illegal".

Agent76 , May 30, 2017 at 3:57 pm GMT

@Tom Welsh Well, another ruler also stated this, "Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed." Joseph Stalin

Rurik , Website May 30, 2017 at 4:06 pm GMT

@annamaria

Brennan is just a regular profiteering opportunist. Someone needs to remind the scoundrel that the civil war in Ukraine (initiated by an illegal Kievan junta sponsored and installed by the US), had started immediately upon Brennan's arrival to Kiev in 2014. He tried to make the visit secret but this did not work and Brennan's presence in Ukraine became widely known: https://sputniknews.com/world/20140415189240842-ANALYSIS-CIA-Director-Brennans-Trip-to-Ukraine-Initiates-Use-Of/
"CIA Director John Brennan visited Ukraine over the weekend, information that was confirmed by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Monday, after being reported by media on Sunday.
Over the same weekend, Kiev authorities cracked down on pro-federalization protests in eastern Ukraine. Regime troops advanced toward a number of cities in eastern Ukraine Tuesday to attack the protesters. "Brennan's appearance in Kiev just before the announcement of a violent crackdown in eastern Ukraine is just too timely to assume that it is a coincidence," Turbeville [an American international affairs expert] said.
"Brennan, who has been actively involved in arming insurgents in Libya, Syria and Venezuela, has a reputation for using thuggish tactics in pursuit of CIA goals," Wayne Madsen, an American investigative journalist told RIA Novosti."
This is a fact showing the US' direct meddling in the affairs of another state and in creating a war on a border with Russian federation. Brennan has been so much immersed in lies and politicking and war crimes that it is impossible to expect any decent reasoning from this miserable opportunist.

the civil war in Ukraine (initiated by an illegal Kievan junta sponsored and installed by the US), had started immediately upon Brennan's arrival to Kiev in 2014

I wouldn't so much call it a civil war, as a ZUSA imposed putsch, installing a Zio-bankster-quisling.

PG:

the United States routinely interferes in elections worldwide and that the action taken in various places including Ukraine goes far beyond phone conversations.

getting to the crux of the matter

when Russia released the phone conversation where ZUS State Dept. – Kagan klan / Zio-bitch Nuland was overheard deciding who was going to be the next president of Ukraine (some democracy), it was this breach of global oligarch protocol that has riled the deepstate Zio-war-scum ever since. Hence all the screeching and hysterics about "Russian hacking".

The thug Brennan, (as you correctly call him [imagine this mug coming into the room as you're about to be 'enhanced interrogated'])

http://www.frontpagemag.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2015/03/John_Brennan.jpg

has his fingerprints not just all over the war crimes and atrocities in Ukraine, but Syria and elsewhere too.

All these war criminals are all scrambling to undermine Trump in the fear that he'll eventually hold some of them accountable for their serial crimes, treasons, and treachery. Which brings us to this curious comment..

The desire to bring down the buffoonish Donald Trump is understandable,

what the hell does Mr. G think will replace him?!

So far the "buffoonish Donald Trump" has not declared a no-fly zone in Syria, as we know the war sow would have by now. He's not materially harmed the Assad regime, but only made symbolic attempts to presumably mollify the war pigs like McBloodstain and co in the zio-media/AIPAC/etc..

His rhetoric notwithstanding, he seems to be making nice with the Russians, to the apoplectic hysteria of people like Brennan and the Stain.

In fact the more people like Brennan and Bloodstain and the zio-media and others seem on the brink of madness, the better Trump seems to me every day.

And if it puts a smelly sock in the mouths of the neocons and war pigs to saber rattle at Iran, with no possibility to actually do them any harm, because of the treaty and Europe's need to respect it, then what's the harm of Trump sounding a little buffoonish if it gets them off his back so that he can circle himself with a Pretorian guard of loyalists and get to the bottom of all of this. I suspect that is what terrifies people like Brennan more than anything else.

[May 30, 2017] The lunatics about fake news about Trump and Russia

May 30, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org

Anonynmous | May 28, 2017 10:27:13 AM | 6

Must read article: The lunatics about fake news about Trump and Russia

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/democrats-are-falling-for-fake-news-about-russia.454971874/

Anonynmous | May 28, 2017 10:32:13 AM | 7
Here we go again, red scare hysteria wont stop:

MSM newest attack: Trump's Jared Kusher accused of talking with russian ambassador.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/trump-girds-for-defense-of-top-aide-in-russia-row/

Ralphieboy | May 28, 2017 10:57:36 AM | 8
It is not so much the secret diplomacy but the background of business contacts and favors owed to Russian investors. IF there were only some way Trump could release some documents that might help dispel those lingering doubts...
james | May 28, 2017 12:27:49 PM | 9
where's nmb?
somebody | May 28, 2017 12:44:36 PM | 10
Posted by: Noirette | May 28, 2017 10:15:31 AM | 5
:-))

Actually you find a lot on it googling.

I guess lots of things went down the memory hole in 1945 in France (as in Germany).

The slogan obviously is designed to show activity without content.

james | May 28, 2017 1:07:09 PM | 11
good post at sst that hoarsewhisper was mentioning on the previous thread..

When Intelligence Isn't - By Patrick Armstrong

Heros | May 28, 2017 1:17:52 PM | 12
@Anonynmous 7
"Here we go again, red scare hysteria wont stop:"

I just finished the 1951 pamphlet by George Washington Armstrong titled Third Zionist War

There is loads of interesting material in it, but what made me bring it up now is the "red scare".

In 1951 things looked pretty bleak for the US:
- To a large degree the US had demilitarized.
- Mao had conquered China with the collusion of Marshall and the Communists in the Truman administration.
- Stalin was busy putting up the Iron Curtain around all of eastern Europe and Germany lay starving and devastated.
- The US navy was blockading Taiwan in the Taiwan straights so Mao could attack McCarthy in N. Korea with out fear of a nationalist invasion.
- McCarthy's desire to bomb the bridges and Chinese camps across the border were denied.
- Truman turned down the offer of 350,000 nationalist Chinese soldiers to help in N. Korea from Chang Kai Chek.
- The Zionists in the senate were blocking the stopping of the continuing looting of German industry by the Morgenthau plan.
- The Germans were furious with Eisenhower and the Nuremburg sham trials.
- Zionist spies within the Truman administration were leaking nuclear secrets and everything else to the soviets.

It is also important to note that Rothschild is derived from "red shield", so when you write "red scare" it is not clear if the scare is due to Zionism or just "useful idiot" Communism. In any case Armstrong points out who exactly had caused the Korean "Police Action" and the death of 50,000 US soldiers. It was the same group steering US politics whether you choose to describe them as Communists or Zionists. Just as with the Russian Revolution in 1917 that cause so many millions of deaths.

The "red scare" is a "red herring" and the deep states continued usage of it diminishes the degree of the threat that Zionism and its symbiotic cousin Communism poses to the entire planet.

frances | May 28, 2017 1:36:08 PM | 13
reply to: librul | May 28, 2017 8:01:29 AM | 2

Remember the future can be changed,have you ever read up on Edgar Casey? His vision of the future was not a WW3 but an environmental catastrophe if the world did not right itself. The disaster would be flooding on a grand scale,the Great Lakes flood into the Mississippi, the sea level's worldwide rise at least 60 feet, America is halved and much of it becomes islands. Europe is uninitiated as well. Not sure what would happen re the world's nuclear plants, they were before his time:)

Hoarsewhisperer | May 28, 2017 1:43:07 PM | 14
My favourite British Airways stuff-up rumour is that it was caused by corporate thriftiness - out-sourcing IT to India.
Airliners spend ~80%+ of their total service life airborne, so the down-time alone is costing shiploads of cash per minute. Reputation damage won't help either...
Jean | May 28, 2017 2:09:19 PM | 15
@5 Noirette

That's a good one. I say that France is living a second occupation since Sarko and Holland. And Macron being a pure creature of the Deep State or whatever else you might call it proves my point.

It will be intereting to see what will come out of Putin's visit to Paris though.

librul | May 28, 2017 2:21:02 PM | 16
@Curtis 4 and @frances 13,

Yes, certainly, and "man who uses other man's crystal ball eats other man's glass".

Still...it nags me.

But, my first point was about doing service, who does enough service?

Lozion | May 28, 2017 2:41:22 PM | 17
His name was #sethrich..
OJS | May 28, 2017 2:52:17 PM | 18
Jean, @15

It's Putin fault, he should change his behavior

[May 29, 2017] They Ought to Go to Jail: Gingrich Goes Off on Leakers

I think greed is the key factor in this particular chain of leaks story.
Notable quotes:
"... Kushner was assigned the job of meeting with Russian officials and bankers by then President-elect Trump, so he wasn't doing anything secretive or surreptitious. ..."
"... Gingrich also noted that there's not a single named source for the story, much like The Washington Post report last week that claimed a senior White House official close to the president was described as a "person of interest" in the Russia probe. ..."
"... He added that if the leakers are involved in former FBI Director Robert Mueller's investigation, he should be enraged. ..."
"... "He ought to lock somebody up," Gingrich said. "The people who leaked the British story were not in the White House. They were in the intelligence community, and they ought to go to jail." ..."
May 25, 2017 | http://insider.foxnews.com

....On "The Story" tonight, Newt Gingrich pointed out that Kushner was assigned the job of meeting with Russian officials and bankers by then President-elect Trump, so he wasn't doing anything secretive or surreptitious.

Gingrich also noted that there's not a single named source for the story, much like The Washington Post report last week that claimed a senior White House official close to the president was described as a "person of interest" in the Russia probe.

"I find that, frankly, sickening," Gingrich said, explaining that these reports are distracting from Trump's "amazing, historic" foreign trip.

"How do you know any of it's true?" Gingrich asked.

He added that if the leakers are involved in former FBI Director Robert Mueller's investigation, he should be enraged.

"He ought to lock somebody up," Gingrich said. "The people who leaked the British story were not in the White House. They were in the intelligence community, and they ought to go to jail."

Watch more above.

[May 29, 2017] What is Pompeo doing at CIA? And why isnt Sessions cleaning out the ratss nest at the DOJ and FBI?

Notable quotes:
"... Purely speculating, I suppose that, from the point of view of the people revealing this information, the end of removing Trump justifies the means. They must believe that it is very important to remove Trump. ..."
"... Unless there has been a major breakdown in US sigint procedures, it seems very unlikely that acknowledgement of cracking of high-level Russian crypto system would be released so casually. ..."
"... I immediately began speculating that someone is trying to panic the Russians ..."
"... IMO, Pat Buchanan has been spot on in his recent notes. His suggestion that President Trump appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and prosecute the leakers is necessary to combat this war of innuendo ..."
"... The cover-up of MH-17 and the consequences of the truth being revealed in the public eye. Must maintain Cold War 2.0! ..."
"... Newspaper publishers and senior editors don't actually have a committee that reaches consensus and hands orders down, they all have similar experience and backgrounds, they have lunch together, they often do each other favors, they talk, they know what each other's opinions are. The "Deep State" is the same. Back in the '50s we referred to them as The Eastern Establishment, the descendants of the New England aristocracy who had a generations-long tradition of "public service," i.e. running the government the way they thought it should be run. John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles were from that milieu. ..."
"... I strongly agree, though, that much of the current hysteria is largely being driven by the Democratic scammers and highly paid "consultants" who are trying to hold on to the money and power they get from their positions. ..."
"... It seems rather apparent that the memes of "Russia brazenly interfered in our pure American democracy" and "Trump team meeting with Russian officials had sinister motives" are just cynical sticks to beat Trump with. ..."
"... Isn't it revealing that the WaPo, Times, CNN, NBC hysteria is all about the request for private communication channels between Trump transition and the Russians and not about the leak that the NSA broke Russian secure communications? ..."
"... Trump needs to get to the bottom of this and start heads rolling and fast. Heads rolling includes firings and prosecutions where applicable. He's supposed to be the consummate businessman. If someone in my department (fortune 500 company) released confidential corporate info to the press, financial or market details, there would be a serious cleaning of house. ..."
"... The block of Trump voters that was unusual in that they were not Republicans or GOP-leaning independents, would constitute a small, albeit decisive, percentage of Trump's total vote. Why such a small bloc should prove threatening to elites that enjoy the support of much larger groups of supporters is not obvious to me. ..."
"... Of course this is mooted now by President Trump's facile willingness to throw that bloc under the bus in his administration staffed partly with Wall Street titans and lobbyists, and, with a healthcare plan designed to hammer white older supporters in the purple swing states and red south. It appears Trump was just kidding about bringing back the middle class, and providing all Americans with cheaper, better, lower out-of-the-pocket healthcare. ..."
"... Perhaps this is an attempt to get the Russians to change their current system in the hopes that they will introduce a vulnerability. If so, the signal has been sent several times. ..."
"... This is far from the first supposed leak that revealed our ability to intercept Russian communications. Is this one worse than the last few times (recall the intercepts where Kislyak supposedly bragged about being able to use Flynn to influence Trump)? ..."
"... Time will tell if these are bonafide leaks or if someone in the IC is playing the long game against the Russians. ..."
"... I'm with Jack, that the simplest explanation is that Hillary was an uninspiring candidate. She couldn't get many Democrats enthused, let alone independent voters in the crucial states in the mid-west where the election was decided. ..."
"... IMO, the character of the election would have been very different if the Democrats had nominated Sanders. He had the enthusiasm factor on his side and a similar message against free trade and useless wars that would have competed well with Trump in the mid-west. Remember that Sanders defeated Hillary in the Michigan primary. ..."
"... The crux of the issue is that the Democrat establishment don't want to accept responsibility that they are Borgist to the core and will do everything to prevent a real outsider from getting their party nomination. At best they'll nominate a faux outsider like Obama. ..."
"... I am willing to bet that what we are observing is a BORG operation-not a Russian one. Let us pick reasonable stakes/time-frame and we can shake on it. ..."
"... For example it seems someone may have infiltrated the legislative branch's IT as well: http://www.wftv.com/news/politics/few-public-answers-to-puzzle-in-congressional-it-investigation/527155464 ..."
"... I see no reason the RNC would have to go to Guccifer2 or Russians for the data. All of that is readily available from certain vendors in the US. These vendors seem to me to be fairly unscrupulous and highly profit oriented. They'd sell their own mother for a few bucks, IMO. ..."
"... Even if the companies refused to sell DNC specific data to the RNC, these companies are populated with highly skilled, but hungry, tech workers from India and Pakistan that have access to probably just about everything (I know because I have hired some of these guys fresh off these projects myself and I like talking to them about their experience, especially after getting a few drinks into them). Some of them would steal and sell data and reports. Guccifer2 seems totally unnecessary. ..."
"... The RNC establishment dislikes Trump almost as much as the Democrats. ..."
"... Good point. I don't see where any of these people are saying they did it on Trump's behalf. I begin to think that Guccifer2 in a US person. I begin to think that this is all a US operation. I will sorely disappointed if Trump doesn't clean these people up and out. Maybe even one car accidents are in order for some of them. ..."
"... The suggestion that 'Guccifer 2.0' was linked to Russian intelligence originally came from 'CrowdStrike' and Dmitri Alperovitch . One can think of few better reasons for suspecting that – whatever his nationality – he was part of a Western-orchestrated 'information operation'. ..."
"... On the credentials of 'CrowdStrike' and Alperovitch, and the corruption of the cybersecurity industry, see a piece posted on 8 May by Jeffrey Carr entitled 'Cyber Intelligence and the Imaginary Other'. In general, Edward Luttwak is not a favourite person of mine, but the remarks Carr quotes from him about the very serious dangers of dealing with other countries on the basis of what you want to believe are to the point ..."
"... When you have a situation where people like Alperovitch can make very large sums of money by telling people what they want to hear, this makes it all too easy for people in positions of power and influence to lock themselves in a bubble. ..."
"... 'Crowdstrike's "Danger Close: Fancy Bear Tracking of Ukrainian Field Artillery Units" is a perfect example of performing cyber attribution with zero ground truth and, as Luttwak described, creating an imaginary "other" rather than making the effort to actually speak with people who know the facts on the ground. ..."
"... In a piece entitled 'Can Facts Slow The DNC Breach RunawayTrain?', Carr treated the suggestion with the contempt it – amply – deserves: 'OK. Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor.' ..."
"... Good thing coming from all that is that at least 60-70% of decent Americans whom still trusted the system will see that political system is completely broken and that change through political means is impossible. ..."
"... Colonel, isn't there another possibility: the information was obtained via a bug placed inside Trump Tower, thereby allowing someone to listen in on that conversation between Kushner, Flynn and Kislyak? The leak of that information could then be used to embarrass Team Trump, and the "news" about the information being obtained from decrypted Russian communications may simply be a cover story intended to disguise the illegal method used to obtain it. ..."
"... After all, which is more difficult: a) decrypting secure diplomatic communications b) sneaking into Trump Tower and planting a bug ..."
"... But consider this: if somebody bugged Trump Tower then they will know two things with certainty: 1) What Was Said between Kushner and Kizlyak 2) Kizlyak will report to Moscow on What Was Said. ..."
"... So, your theory is that the Obama Administration ordered an illegal surreptitious physical bugging of Trump Tower in order to know what the Trumpies were talking about. Well, that is what Trump claims as well . pl ..."
"... No, I didn't say that. I said that I agreed that any "black bag job" on Trump Tower done under the authorization of a FISA or other court warrant would be legal.What I pointed out (correctly) is that the absence of such a FISA warrant doesn't not mean that Trump Tower has not been bugged, and I brought up the instance of Tricky Dickie's plumbers to illustrate that point. ..."
"... And the FBI: looking into Trump-Russia for 10 months, nothing to show for it and meanwhile the torrential disclosure of really sensitive secrets continues unabated. Federal Bureau of Incompetence. ..."
"... I know that you don't know, but the lack of action by the responsible officials is worsening this whole mess. Politicians (Sessions, Pompeo) -- talkers not doers. And Trump??? Instead of kicking these guys asses to fix it, he's tweeting and throwing tantrums. ..."
May 29, 2017 | turcopolier.typepad.com
mistah charley, ph.d. ,

Purely speculating, I suppose that, from the point of view of the people revealing this information, the end of removing Trump justifies the means. They must believe that it is very important to remove Trump. Possibly they are right.

Procopius -> mistah charley, ph.d. ,

I agree that the people who decide to burn assets as in this case must believe it is more important to remove Trump, but I don't know their reasons for thinking so. I think Pence will be at least an order of magnitude worse. I can't even begin to imagine if Pence gets removed, too, how much worse Paul Ryan would be.

b ,

I would not exclude though that the breach was not a real breach. The Russian ambo is a professional player. Some maskirovka may be part of this.

What is the most important though is that the media and IC try to fabricate a scandal out of contacts between presidential advisors and foreign diplomats.

It is the constitutional prerogative of the president to set and do foreign policy as he sees fit. His advisors acted in his name when they contacted Russian diplomats to set up a communication backchannel. Advisors of former presidents have done the same in such cases. It is nether a scandal nor a crime.

The real scandal are these leaks and the interference by the Intelligence Community and its puppets into the president's constitutional prerogative.

Bill Herschel -> b ,

Trump will not be impeached. It's all about the midterms, which might though I think not deliver a House majority ot the Democrats. But there will be no impeachment. President Pence? Don't hold your breath.

Henshaw -> Bill Herschel ,
Unless there has been a major breakdown in US sigint procedures, it seems very unlikely that acknowledgement of cracking of high-level Russian crypto system would be released so casually. More likely that Russians intentionally sent it through a less secure/known compromised channel.
Fredw ,
I immediately began speculating that someone is trying to panic the Russians using information obtained from some other source. On the other hand, you seem to imply that successful interception of communications is common and to be expected. I don't know what to think. I am floored.
Ghostship ,
US SIGINT successfully intercepts and decrypts what must surely be encrypted Russian diplomatic communications.
Maybe they're the communications the Russian aren't bothered about or even want the U.S. IC to intercept and decrypt. In this case the information is not sensitive as far as the Russians are concerned but it being made public demonstrates there are major problems somewhere in the U.S. government, and I'm assessing probably the State Department.
Andy ,

Even as an intel guy I realize that leaks are sometimes necessary and inevitable in a free society, but these recent actions are unjustified and were carried out for the sole purpose of court intrigue/beltway partisan politics.

Jack ,

This was exactly my feeling on reading the WaPo story. There should no longer be any doubt the extent the NeverTrumpers in the media and upper echelons of government will go to take him down. No national security secret is sacrosanct enough for these people. What makes them so desperate? Or has the level of callousness reached such a level that any and all of them believe they can act with impunity? The NeverTrumpers should recognize the genie is now out the bottle and every future president will be subject to the whims of this unaccountable fifth column.

IMO, Pat Buchanan has been spot on in his recent notes. His suggestion that President Trump appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and prosecute the leakers is necessary to combat this war of innuendo . And second, who is gonna be next after the Confederate leaders in the cross-hairs of the PC crowd? The respect for both sides in our civil war is being thrown away by denigrating the southern leadership while absolving the Unionists of their rape & pillage.

Thomas -> Jack ,

The cover-up of MH-17 and the consequences of the truth being revealed in the public eye. Must maintain Cold War 2.0!

FB Ali ,

The US MSM is party to this frenzy of destruction. Both seem not to care how much damage this is doing to the United States.

The world watches in wonder and bemusement at this spectacle. Russia and China probably cannot believe their good fortune in having their main adversary/competitor thus publicly commit harakiri .

turcopolier ,

The term "Deep State" implies a bureaucratic conspiracy. IMO that is very unlikely. If there is a conspiracy against trump it is among the Democratic holdovers among presidential appointees. A number of them have the access required to receive such documents. pl

Procopius -> turcopolier ,

Newspaper publishers and senior editors don't actually have a committee that reaches consensus and hands orders down, they all have similar experience and backgrounds, they have lunch together, they often do each other favors, they talk, they know what each other's opinions are. The "Deep State" is the same. Back in the '50s we referred to them as The Eastern Establishment, the descendants of the New England aristocracy who had a generations-long tradition of "public service," i.e. running the government the way they thought it should be run. John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles were from that milieu.

I strongly agree, though, that much of the current hysteria is largely being driven by the Democratic scammers and highly paid "consultants" who are trying to hold on to the money and power they get from their positions.

Sam Peralta ,

This leak that we can decrypt Russian secure diplomatic communications proves that those intent on bringing down Trump, hate him more than the purported enemy Russia.

It seems rather apparent that the memes of "Russia brazenly interfered in our pure American democracy" and "Trump team meeting with Russian officials had sinister motives" are just cynical sticks to beat Trump with. Actors within our federal government are quite happy destroying our SIGINT advantage if that means they can take down Trump.

Isn't it revealing that the WaPo, Times, CNN, NBC hysteria is all about the request for private communication channels between Trump transition and the Russians and not about the leak that the NSA broke Russian secure communications?

turcopolier ,

It is IMO much more likely that the spy (leaker) is a presidential appointee who is a holdover from the BHO Administration rather than a professional employees of the IC. You greatly over estimate the power of the IC. Normally, the political appointees manipulate the IC people and not the other way around.

I would point to people like Evelyn Farkas who several times said on TV that she and a group of Democrats have banded together to screw Trump by using their access to government information. As for Maskirovka, what advantage would the Russians see in inventing a story like this? pl

LeaNder -> turcopolier ,

I would not exclude though that the breach was not a real breach. The Russian ambo is a professional player. Some maskirovka may be part of this.

Are you suggesting, however indirectly, the Russians helped out the Trump government by feeding a false info into the US media stream? with the knowledge it would lead nowhere but distract attention for a while?

J -> turcopolier ,

Here's a DTIC public released student research report from 1981 Garmisch regarding маскировка:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a112903.pdf

turcopolier ,

IMO this is not fake news. It is a massive violation of the US espionage laws. pl

Eric Newhill -> turcopolier ,
Ok then. I thought you were being tongue in cheek b/c it would represent such a massive violation of US espionage rules that it couldn't possibly be actually happening.

So you're serious. Trump needs to get to the bottom of this and start heads rolling and fast. Heads rolling includes firings and prosecutions where applicable. He's supposed to be the consummate businessman. If someone in my department (fortune 500 company) released confidential corporate info to the press, financial or market details, there would be a serious cleaning of house. Examples would be made. It would be ugly, but understood as totally necessary. That Trump has not begun this process is very disconcerting.

bks ,
There is no conspiracy . Trump is not fit for the office. He is now in zugzwang because if he throws anyone out of the inner circle they will reveal the level of ineptitude, and if he brings anyone in from outside, they will find out about it. His sons, who are supposed to be running his business interests at arm's length, invited themselves to a GOP high-level strategy meeting; the emoluments clause be damned.
TV -> bks ,

And Hillary, and the accompanying Clinton crime family, was fit?

different clue -> TV ,

To suspect that Trump is not fit for office is not to retro-decide that Clinton would have been fit for office after all.

My low opinion of many aspects of Trump does not elevate my opinion-after-the-fact of Clinton. Nor does it make me wish in hindsight that I had voted for Clinton after all. I always considered Trump a dangerous risk worth running to avoid the certain danger of a President Clinton.

And so it might well seem for bks.

Barbara Ann ,
This story states above the fold, right corner that US officials who either produced the report of the intercept or received the report of this successful intercept outside the IC in State, Defense, the NSC, etc. informed the Washington Post of the frailty of Russian diplomatic communications

Para. 2: " ,according to intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials." - is that the part to which you refer?

If your premise is right; that the leak exposes the fact that Russian diplomatic communications are insecure, this would appear to make what Snowden did look like a minor transgression. It would also appear to indicate that the leaker considers Trump a greater risk to national security that Russia. This rather ironically somewhat undermines the whole 'links to Russia' thing.

Crown Jewels of this magnitude must be a very closely guarded secret - i.e. very few people in the IC community and even fewer outside would be aware of the fact that Russian diplomatic encryption has been compromised. Intel reports produced using such sensitive source data must go to great lengths to disguise the nature of that source. Surely only the POTUS and a handful of other very senior officials would have access to raw decrypted intercepts. If this part of the WaPo article is to be believed then, the leaker would seem to be among a very rarefied group.

Cold War Zoomie -> Barbara Ann ,

Not even close.

"Crown Jewels of this magnitude must be a very closely guarded secret ,"

Yes and no. Reports are shared, not raw intercepts (typically not, but who knows?). The "gist" of the collection point was likely in the report(s) mentioned in the article, but not the details that are more tightly controlled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_cycle

Decameron ,
You can't make this up! Colonel, you truly captured the essence of the Kushner-Flynn meeting with the Russians.

In the tradition of Groucho's Freedonia, Chaplin's Great Dictator, Boris and Natasha,and Alfred E. Newman. But it really happened.

FB Ali ,

You obviously know more about such matters than I do.

However, it seems to me that actions are being taken by a number of persons, all aimed at bringing down the Trump presidency (without, of course, any obvious collusion between them). The motivation behind this could be either or both of the following:

It seems to me that both of these are in play. Which implies that both the Democratic establishment as well as (at least, some) members of the Borg are behind this vicious campaign. I have no proof whether there is any overt collusion between (though it would surprise me if at least some individuals among the two groups did not consult together).

dilbert dogbert -> FB Ali ,

http://uselectionatlas.org/INFORMATION/INFORMATION/electcollege_history.php

There were good reasons back in 1787 but are those reasons still valid today?

Dr.Puck -> FB Ali ,
The block of Trump voters that was unusual in that they were not Republicans or GOP-leaning independents, would constitute a small, albeit decisive, percentage of Trump's total vote. Why such a small bloc should prove threatening to elites that enjoy the support of much larger groups of supporters is not obvious to me.

Of course this is mooted now by President Trump's facile willingness to throw that bloc under the bus in his administration staffed partly with Wall Street titans and lobbyists, and, with a healthcare plan designed to hammer white older supporters in the purple swing states and red south. It appears Trump was just kidding about bringing back the middle class, and providing all Americans with cheaper, better, lower out-of-the-pocket healthcare.

As far as point number two goes, the reply to anybody who thinks Russia might be converted to a friend rather than a foe has to begin with:

"Perhaps the USA should target their nuclear deterrent at someone else, and, perhaps the Russians could do the same."

Cold War Zoomie ,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project

Freudenschade ,

Perhaps this is an attempt to get the Russians to change their current system in the hopes that they will introduce a vulnerability. If so, the signal has been sent several times.

This is far from the first supposed leak that revealed our ability to intercept Russian communications. Is this one worse than the last few times (recall the intercepts where Kislyak supposedly bragged about being able to use Flynn to influence Trump)?

Time will tell if these are bonafide leaks or if someone in the IC is playing the long game against the Russians.

Sam Peralta -> The Twisted Genius ,

"..until we understand the full scope of the Russian info op."

If you had to speculate, what would be the extent of this info op by the Russians? Since Clapper & Brennan and the breathless MSM have this incredible campaign of innuendo, I am curious what this info op could possibly be. Have the Russians executed such an info op anywhere else that we could look to get a sense?

"The Trump/RNC ground game was way more sophisticated and far reaching than anyone gives them credit for."

I don't believe they had much of a GOTV campaign, compared to Hillary's. They just didn't have the staffing to organize and execute folks with iPads knocking on doors in the neighborhoods.

"It was an information operation (like all political campaigns) worthy of anything the Russians could have developed. It certainly wasn't just a get out the vote campaign. It was also a suppress/discourage the vote campaign."

They did have a small operation in San Antonio managed by Jared Kushner staffed with Silicon Valley social media folks put together by Peter Thiel that tested and targeted messaging and were able to monitor enthusiasm that informed where Trump held his rallies. This enthusiasm differential led to many more rallies by Trump. But, one can argue this enthusiasm was directly linked to Trump running an outsider campaign and politically active voters preference for the anti-establishment candidate. Recall the voter enthusiasm for Obama vs McCain, when Obama ran to change the system - close Guantanamo, end the wars, etc. Note that Hillary was backed big by the Silicon Valley establishment - Eric Schmidt & Google as well as Sheryl Sandberg & Facebook among others. Voter suppression tactics are also not new. Every election we have stories of robocalls and other communication methods targeting some voters that they can't vote without IDs or their polling station has changed among ways to suppress votes. Both parties engage in this.

I'm with Jack, that the simplest explanation is that Hillary was an uninspiring candidate. She couldn't get many Democrats enthused, let alone independent voters in the crucial states in the mid-west where the election was decided.

IMO, the character of the election would have been very different if the Democrats had nominated Sanders. He had the enthusiasm factor on his side and a similar message against free trade and useless wars that would have competed well with Trump in the mid-west. Remember that Sanders defeated Hillary in the Michigan primary.

The crux of the issue is that the Democrat establishment don't want to accept responsibility that they are Borgist to the core and will do everything to prevent a real outsider from getting their party nomination. At best they'll nominate a faux outsider like Obama.

Ishmael Zechariah -> The Twisted Genius ,

A few questions not necessarily in logical order: Did the RNC support Trump without qualification during the election cycle in the USA? Do they do so now? Do you think it was the Russians or a disgruntled Sanders supporter who supplied the DNC correspondence to Wikileaks? Who killed that fellow? SMERSH? Did Ms. Clinton violate security rules by using unprotected servers? Do you consider Salon.com a reliable source? Does their reporting of the Syria story stand up to scrutiny?

I am willing to bet that what we are observing is a BORG operation-not a Russian one. Let us pick reasonable stakes/time-frame and we can shake on it.

Ishmael Zechariah

Fred -> The Twisted Genius ,

Thanks goodness no Democrats got involved with the Russians, well other than by giving half-million dollar speeches. Perhaps it was another state actor, like Pakistan, who penetrated them. Maybe they were pissed off their guest, Osama, got knocked of by BHO while you know who was SOS. "f you prick us do we not bleed? ,.And if you wrong us shall we not revenge?"

For example it seems someone may have infiltrated the legislative branch's IT as well: http://www.wftv.com/news/politics/few-public-answers-to-puzzle-in-congressional-it-investigation/527155464

Apparently she of the "rigged primary" (Debbie Wasserman Schultz) isn't too happy her "lost" electronics wasn't returned by the Capital Hill Police
http://jamiedupree.blog.wsbradio.com/2017/05/27/few-public-answers-to-puzzle-in-congressional-it-investigation/

Now one has to wonder why the words "hacking" or "bleach bit" weren't used by either party in the video provided by wsb radio?

"Once the FBI was on them, they couldn't fight back." You mean they couldn't have their spouse sit down to chat about the grandchildren with the Attorney General?

As to micro-targeting of voters, that has been around a long time. The first exposure I had to the idea was Tom Loftus' book "The Art of Legislative Politics". The electronic era was well represented by Mark Grebner:

http://lansingcitypulse.com/article-8187-end-of-an-era-for-the-master-of-voter-lists.html

Eric Newhill -> Fred ,
I see no reason the RNC would have to go to Guccifer2 or Russians for the data. All of that is readily available from certain vendors in the US. These vendors seem to me to be fairly unscrupulous and highly profit oriented. They'd sell their own mother for a few bucks, IMO.

Even if the companies refused to sell DNC specific data to the RNC, these companies are populated with highly skilled, but hungry, tech workers from India and Pakistan that have access to probably just about everything (I know because I have hired some of these guys fresh off these projects myself and I like talking to them about their experience, especially after getting a few drinks into them). Some of them would steal and sell data and reports. Guccifer2 seems totally unnecessary.

But mostly it's all available from the vendors themselves.

Fred -> Eric Newhill ,

Of course they wouldn't need a hacker for voter data. The point you miss is that the RNC was supporting whom prior to Trump? Cruz, Rubio, Kaisich and the rest; not least being the great Jeb! Bush - I think he blew through $130,000,000 before becoming loser # twelve. The RNC establishment dislikes Trump almost as much as the Democrats.

Eric Newhill -> Fred ,
Good point. I don't see where any of these people are saying they did it on Trump's behalf. I begin to think that Guccifer2 in a US person. I begin to think that this is all a US operation. I will sorely disappointed if Trump doesn't clean these people up and out. Maybe even one car accidents are in order for some of them.
David Habakkuk -> Eric Newhill ,

The suggestion that 'Guccifer 2.0' was linked to Russian intelligence originally came from 'CrowdStrike' and Dmitri Alperovitch . One can think of few better reasons for suspecting that – whatever his nationality – he was part of a Western-orchestrated 'information operation'.

On the credentials of 'CrowdStrike' and Alperovitch, and the corruption of the cybersecurity industry, see a piece posted on 8 May by Jeffrey Carr entitled 'Cyber Intelligence and the Imaginary Other'. In general, Edward Luttwak is not a favourite person of mine, but the remarks Carr quotes from him about the very serious dangers of dealing with other countries on the basis of what you want to believe are to the point .

When you have a situation where people like Alperovitch can make very large sums of money by telling people what they want to hear, this makes it all too easy for people in positions of power and influence to lock themselves in a bubble.

As Carr argues – assembling a mass of supporting evidence:

'Crowdstrike's "Danger Close: Fancy Bear Tracking of Ukrainian Field Artillery Units" is a perfect example of performing cyber attribution with zero ground truth and, as Luttwak described, creating an imaginary "other" rather than making the effort to actually speak with people who know the facts on the ground. '

(See https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/cyber-intelligence-and-the-imaginary-other-acb340e8d87f .)

After 'CrowdStrike' made the initial link to the FSB and more particularly the GRU, the suggestion was made that the identification of the initials of Dzerzhinsky in the material from 'Guccifer 2.0' pointed unambiguously to a Russian origin. So according to Thomas Rid, of King's College, London:

'The metadata in the leaked documents are perhaps most revealing: one dumped document was modified using Russian language settings, by a user named "Феликс Эдмундович," a code name referring to the founder of the Soviet Secret Police, the Cheka, memorialised in a 15-ton iron statue in front of the old KGB headquarters during Soviet times.

In a piece entitled 'Can Facts Slow The DNC Breach RunawayTrain?', Carr treated the suggestion with the contempt it – amply – deserves: 'OK. Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor.'

(See https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/can-facts-slow-the-dnc-breach-runaway-train-lets-try-14040ac68a55 .)

For another good account of the history, including a recollection of Alperovitch as a bit-part-player in the campaign to suggest a massive Russian cyber-offensive against Georgia at the time of the 2008 war, see a piece posted in March by Yasha Levine, entitled 'From Russia, with Panic', at https://thebaffler.com/salvos/from-russia-with-panic-levine .nt.

The Twisted Genius

I remember the stories about the Clintons being deeply involved with the Chinese during the Clinton administration. That was treasonous and scandalous at the time. And Big Grandma was supposed to be bought and paid for by the Saudis just last year. The DNC purposefully built a notably undemocratic primary process with a superdelegate system to guarantee the primacy of the smoke filled back room. They did that because they admired the past orderliness of the RNC process. What an unmitigated disaster that turned out to be. All this sordidness cannot be used to justify RNC and Trump team sordidness. Sunlight purifies all, although all those in power seem to abhor the sunlight like Nosferatu.

Fred -> The Twisted Genius ,

The DNC lawyers have just argued in court that they don't need to have fair primary processes:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/dnc-argues-in-court-we-dont-owe-anyone-a-fair-primary-process/article/2621767

Back in 2008 one of Obama's intellectual mentors, the husband of Samantha Power, Cass Sunstein, was arguing that there should be agents provocateur in the election process:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585##

Apparently the New Hope and Change world order was going to be perpetual. It seems we know where the "Resistance" gets it's intellectual foundations.

" Sunlight purifies all ," I would sure like to see some of that in action.

different clue -> Fred ,

Well . . . that's what this Bitter Berner lawsuit hopes to achieve. Also, they hope to get the Court to FORCE the DNC to give back all the donations-money it raised from Hopeful Berners under the false pretense of holding a fair and balanced Primary.

If the Bitter Berners can win their suit, and win every appeal, the DNC may be hazzing a sad biggly.

Keith Harbaugh -> The Twisted Genius ,
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/13/the-soft-coup-of-russia-gate/ where Parry seems to think worrying about Russian attempts to bug the Oval Office is laughable.

Parry compares worrying about such things to vintage-1960 comedies and satires:

One could picture Boris and Natasha, the evil spies in the Bullwinkle cartoons, disguised as photographers slipping listening devices between the cushions of the sofas.

Or we could hear how Russians are again threatening to "impurify all of our precious bodily fluids," as "Dr. Strangelove" character, Gen. Jack D. Ripper,
warned us in the 1964 movie.

I am willing to believe that the USG/MSM stories about, say, the supposed chemical weapon attack in Syria are spin to promote the interests of Israel, but I am not willing to dismiss very proper concerns about Russian intelligence efforts. For those totally naïve about such things, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device)

Why would Parry dismiss such concerns? That part of his article is clearly consistent with known Russian interests.

Sharac ,

It just might be that they considered this a "petty" matter not worth some extra hassle as they've probably assumed that everyone on Trumps team will be monitored and main locations such as Trump tower definitely not secured (aka "bugged from basement to the roof"). Also what better for Russia than US having non shooting civil war (with sad prospect of it becoming shooting if libtards continue with their nonsense) and much of its assets looking internally.

Good thing coming from all that is that at least 60-70% of decent Americans whom still trusted the system will see that political system is completely broken and that change through political means is impossible.

Yeah, Right -> turcopolier ,

Colonel, isn't there another possibility: the information was obtained via a bug placed inside Trump Tower, thereby allowing someone to listen in on that conversation between Kushner, Flynn and Kislyak? The leak of that information could then be used to embarrass Team Trump, and the "news" about the information being obtained from decrypted Russian communications may simply be a cover story intended to disguise the illegal method used to obtain it.

After all, which is more difficult: a) decrypting secure diplomatic communications b) sneaking into Trump Tower and planting a bug

Just a thought...

LeaNder -> turcopolier ,

I am on my way out for a while, anyway. Which means too, I followed matters more superficially for a couple of days already. My excuses to everyone involved.

*******

Fact is, I was close to dropping my response to b, but then I stumbled across this in your response: "As for Maskirovka, what advantage would the Russians see in inventing a story like this? pl "

some of you are wasting time here by making up the most outlandish theories imaginable.

No 'outlandish theories' involved beyond wanting to understand what b meant, really. Besides, you can go back and check my comment during the election campaign around here, I was never a fan of "Russia-gate" as it surfaced already then. If I understand your anger at all ,

******

Looked at very, very superficially the most recent story in the series seems to be a variation of Clinton's private server theme. Yes, no doubt for the nitwit, non-expert on matters. Not a theorist, by the way. Nitwit watcher only. But interested in narratives.

But: How can I put this well and short enough

a) Clinton's private server endangered at least the whatever level of secret content sent that way. If its main reason wasn't to hide almost everything else?

b) Jared Kustner, allegedly went even one step further, by intending to deliver information in a setting that wouldn't even leave a trace (or need a shredder after - the public wouldn't even know). In other words, he seemingly wanted to make sure no one could watch or check.

Room full of mirrors?

Cold War Zoomie ,

Lots of people can read lots of reports. But who gets briefed? Hmmmm.

Yeah, Right ,
But consider this: if somebody bugged Trump Tower then they will know two things with certainty: 1) What Was Said between Kushner and Kizlyak 2) Kizlyak will report to Moscow on What Was Said.

Those buggers don't need to decrypt (or even intercept) any communication between Kizlyak and Moscow, they need only assume that Kizlyak will faithfully do his job in order to deduce that such a communication would be sent.

So their bugging of that room in Trump Tower is a twofer:

1) they can leak the conversation to embarrass Trump

2) they can embarrass the Russians by insinuating that their encrypted communications system is compromised.

"A US government entity that desired to bug Trump Tower would require a FISA or other court warrant to do a "black bag job" legally"

Agreed, if they wanted to do this legally. I believe that Richard Nixon never asked for a court warrant to break into the Watergate Tower. But in that case absence of evidence turned out not to be evidence of absence - he simply did it anyway, and hang the legal niceties.

turcopolier ,

So, your theory is that the Obama Administration ordered an illegal surreptitious physical bugging of Trump Tower in order to know what the Trumpies were talking about. Well, that is what Trump claims as well . pl

Yeah, Right -> turcopolier ,
No, I didn't say that. I said that I agreed that any "black bag job" on Trump Tower done under the authorization of a FISA or other court warrant would be legal.What I pointed out (correctly) is that the absence of such a FISA warrant doesn't not mean that Trump Tower has not been bugged, and I brought up the instance of Tricky Dickie's plumbers to illustrate that point.

This is my theory: there is no reason to believe the claim that this intel was obtained by decrypting the communications between Moscow and its ambassador in Washington.

There is good reason to doubt that claim i.e. if it were true then this would itself constitute a major breach of "sources and methods". So my theory is that this part of the story is false, in which case the intel had to have be obtained in some other manner. As in: someone had a bug in that room. I'm not saying that Obama ordered such a bugging. I'm not saying that the US IC put such a bug in there. All I'm suggesting is that the source of this intel was a bug in that room, and it went from there to WaPo via Person Or Persons Unknown.

turcopolier ,

As a former DIO for the ME and S Asia and SSO det. commander long ago I assure you that some SIGINT reports are disseminated in "raw" form to recipients who are not analysts. pl

Cold War Zoomie -> turcopolier ,

Thanks for the clarification. That's a side of "production" I didn't know, as usual. Back to minding the cogs in the machine.

TV ,

And the FBI: looking into Trump-Russia for 10 months, nothing to show for it and meanwhile the torrential disclosure of really sensitive secrets continues unabated. Federal Bureau of Incompetence.

turcopolier ,

As I wrote, IMO it is more likely to be political appointees from the BHO world who are still in government who are doing the leaking. They have just as much access depending on their job. Think Evelyn Farkas and her like. pl

TV -> turcopolier ,
I know that you don't know, but the lack of action by the responsible officials is worsening this whole mess. Politicians (Sessions, Pompeo) -- talkers not doers.
And Trump??? Instead of kicking these guys asses to fix it, he's tweeting and throwing tantrums.

[May 29, 2017] Former CIA Officer NYT May Have Compromised Terror Investigation to Hurt Trump

Notable quotes:
"... Former CIA officer Mike Baker said on "Your World" that the leakers in the White House and intelligence agencies will only stop "if there are consequences." Baker said that those who had access to the leaked sensitive material must be "hauled in" and talked to very directly about their activities, and in some cases polygraphed. ..."
"... Leaks from the White House have been copious lately, causing headaches for President Trump and his staff. "When you continue to lower the bar and you continue to normalize the idea that, you know, people can't keep their pie holes shut, and it's okay because there's ultimately no consequences, then sure, you create this environment where suddenly you have news articles that contain only anonymous sources," Baker said. ..."
May 29, 2017 | insider.foxnews.com

Former CIA officer Mike Baker said on "Your World" that the leakers in the White House and intelligence agencies will only stop "if there are consequences." Baker said that those who had access to the leaked sensitive material must be "hauled in" and talked to very directly about their activities, and in some cases polygraphed.

The New York Times published a report yesterday on the terror attack in Manchester that contained sensitive, detailed information on the investigation into the horrific bombing. While the information may have come from Britain, Baker said that the Times may also have knowingly disrupted an ongoing terrorist investigation in hopes of taking another shot at the Trump administration.

"It's a possibility," Baker told host Neil Cavuto.

Leaks from the White House have been copious lately, causing headaches for President Trump and his staff. "When you continue to lower the bar and you continue to normalize the idea that, you know, people can't keep their pie holes shut, and it's okay because there's ultimately no consequences, then sure, you create this environment where suddenly you have news articles that contain only anonymous sources," Baker said.

Watch more from "Your World" above.

[May 29, 2017] How the Kushner Story Hurts U.S. Intelligence The American Conservative

The initial hypnosis of Philip Giraldi that Russian diplomatic communications are compromised is logical, but at the same time pretty weak.
More probably the intersection occurred in Trump tower which was "bugged". Or this is a fake injected to harm Trump.
Notable quotes:
"... It is generally believed, correctly, that the NSA intercepts nearly all diplomatic communications originating from embassies in Washington, which is not to say that it is always successful at decrypting them. Decryption requires an enormous expenditure of time, money, and effort. ..."
"... Now that the Russians know that their communications are not secure, they will take necessary steps to tighten up their procedures and protocols, which means that the United States government will no longer be able to read their message traffic and will start all over with having to break into the new system. This reality will be enormously costly both to Russia and the U.S., and it will mean that a major intelligence advantage that Washington possessed will no longer be viable. ..."
"... However one feels about the paranoid and reactionary post-9/11 level of global spying carried out by the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies, being able to read an adversary's mail provides a huge advantage if one wants to avoid surprises and mitigate factors that could result in unnecessary conflict. ..."
"... And, to be completely fair, it also gives one an advantage if you are planning on mischief yourself and want to know how an opponent will react. Either way, that ability would have been one of the crown jewels of the intelligence community-and losing that advantage over Russia is an enormous, self-inflicted intelligence failure. Yet the media has chosen to ignore that real disaster because they want the story to be Kushner and Trump, not the leaker who has done tremendous damage to the nation's intelligence collection capability. ..."
"... But the NSA had actually broken them and was reading their messages." Well, *maybe*. There are, of course, a number of alternative possibilities. ..."
"... Let's face it: the only information we have access to must come from one of several highly untrustworthy sources. None of these sources consider providing the truth to the American public to be central to their mission. ..."
"... The very countries Washington should be cultivating, not demonizing. But this kind of irrational behaviour is to be expected of an empire in irreversible decline. Sad. ..."
May 29, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

... ... ...

So it is likely that the Kushner story will become just another part of the endless special counsel investigation into the Trump administration's alleged Russian links. Yet the real story should be the "leak" that revealed the details of the Kushner proposal. The leaker, whoever he was, provided highly classified and very restricted access information to the media; it indicated that the Kushner discussions with the Russians took place in Trump Tower and that a report on the proposal was then relayed back to Moscow using Russian diplomatic communications, which were intercepted, decrypted, and retained by the National Security Agency (NSA).

It is generally believed, correctly, that the NSA intercepts nearly all diplomatic communications originating from embassies in Washington, which is not to say that it is always successful at decrypting them. Decryption requires an enormous expenditure of time, money, and effort. It is almost always limited to communications of countries that are considered to be adversaries-which these days would include Russia, China, and Iran-or potential sources of information on transnational issues like terrorism or drug trafficking. And even when there is a major effort, the attempt to crack the encryption sometimes fails, particularly when one is dealing with a sophisticated opponent.

It is clear from the Kushner leaker's tale that the Russians were confident that their diplomatic communications were secure. But the NSA had actually broken them and was reading their messages. Now that the Russians know that their communications are not secure, they will take necessary steps to tighten up their procedures and protocols, which means that the United States government will no longer be able to read their message traffic and will start all over with having to break into the new system. This reality will be enormously costly both to Russia and the U.S., and it will mean that a major intelligence advantage that Washington possessed will no longer be viable.

However one feels about the paranoid and reactionary post-9/11 level of global spying carried out by the NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies, being able to read an adversary's mail provides a huge advantage if one wants to avoid surprises and mitigate factors that could result in unnecessary conflict.

And, to be completely fair, it also gives one an advantage if you are planning on mischief yourself and want to know how an opponent will react. Either way, that ability would have been one of the crown jewels of the intelligence community-and losing that advantage over Russia is an enormous, self-inflicted intelligence failure. Yet the media has chosen to ignore that real disaster because they want the story to be Kushner and Trump, not the leaker who has done tremendous damage to the nation's intelligence collection capability.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

Howard, May 29, 2017 at 12:43 pm

"But the NSA had actually broken them and was reading their messages." Well, *maybe*. There are, of course, a number of alternative possibilities. The information might be intercepted BEFORE it is encrypted, either through technological means or because the Russians have a leak of their own. Or it could be that the alleged NSA discoveries are in fact plausible inventions.

Let's face it: the only information we have access to must come from one of several highly untrustworthy sources. None of these sources consider providing the truth to the American public to be central to their mission. The best we can do is to create Just-So stories that seem to fit the claims made by these untrustworthy sources.

Lefty, May 29, 2017 at 1:14 pm

Mr. Giraldi,

Your thread unravels if it was the Russians who leaked the intelligence. After all, as an operation to discredit the president and his chief advisor, it was flawless.
In this reading Jared stepped into the trap neatly set for him. He provided the powder and the fuse, leaving it to the Russians to light it off when they pleased.
And I guess this doesn't make Flynn's failure to protect Jared and his extensive contacts with the Russians look any better.

Hanna Khayyat, May 29, 2017 at 1:25 pm

Call the plumbers at once!

delia ruhe, May 29, 2017 at 3:24 pm

" countries that are considered to be [US] adversaries-which these days would include Russia, China, and Iran "

The very countries Washington should be cultivating, not demonizing. But this kind of irrational behaviour is to be expected of an empire in irreversible decline. Sad.

[May 29, 2017] Bongino Kushner 'Leak' the Latest in 'Evidence-Free' Probe to Destroy Trump

Notable quotes:
"... Former federal agent Dan Bongino said a new report from sources in the Trump administration is the latest in the press' mission to "take down the president." "The Washington Post" reported that top adviser Jared Kushner tried to set up "back-channel" communications with Russian officials. ..."
"... "Is that a federal crime?" he asked incredulously. "This is really disturbing." Bongino said left-leaning media outlets like the Post and the "New York Times" are engaged in an "evidence-free investigation that is simply determined to take down the president." He said White House leaks must stop and that the entire Trump-Russia probe will be a "stain on the nation." ..."
May 29, 2017 | insider.foxnews.com

Former federal agent Dan Bongino said a new report from sources in the Trump administration is the latest in the press' mission to "take down the president." "The Washington Post" reported that top adviser Jared Kushner tried to set up "back-channel" communications with Russian officials.

Bongino, who unsuccessfully ran for Congress in the Maryland panhandle, said he similarly bought a burner phone to create a "back-channel" with his campaign manager.

"Is that a federal crime?" he asked incredulously. "This is really disturbing." Bongino said left-leaning media outlets like the Post and the "New York Times" are engaged in an "evidence-free investigation that is simply determined to take down the president." He said White House leaks must stop and that the entire Trump-Russia probe will be a "stain on the nation."

Watch the clip above.

[May 25, 2017] A Special Prosecutor for Criminal Leaks by Pat Buchanan

Notable quotes:
"... Why do these officials become criminals, and why do the mainstream media protect them? Because this seedy bargain is the best way to advance their common interests. ..."
"... For the media, bringing down Trump is also good for business. TV ratings of anti-Trump media are soaring. The "failing New York Times" has seen a surge in circulation. The Pulitzers are beckoning. And bringing down a president is exhilarating. As Ben Bradlee reportedly said during the Iran-Contra scandal that was wounding President Reagan, "We haven't had this much fun since Watergate." ..."
"... With the Russian spin, the so-called liberal establishment landed an unprecedented coup. It was made up by the Dems and the Obama in the background, to tie President Trump's hand and bring him in the confrontation with the Russians. The US "Deep State" needs a bogeyman to enrich themselves by producing weapons. ..."
"... One is surprised that the Trump Administration allows playing a cat-and-mouse game with it. They should crack down on the FBI internal structure and get after the leaks. Trump should be as merciless as Obama was with the whistleblowers. Perhaps he should be even harder because all of the people had top security clearance. That means, they committed a felony. ..."
"... I think the Seth Rich story needs to be fully investigated, and, even if the Kim Dotcom story was phony, the Rich thing looks real if based only on the reaction to it by the power structure. ..."
May 23, 2017 | www.unz.com
20Comments Reply

Who is the real threat to the national security?

Is it President Trump who shared with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov the intelligence that ISIS was developing laptop bombs to put aboard airliners?

Or is it The Washington Post that ferreted out and published this code-word intelligence, and splashed the details on its front page, alerting the world, and ISIS, to what we knew.

President Trump has the authority to declassify security secrets. And in sharing that intel with the Russians, who have had airliners taken down by bombs, he was trying to restore a relationship.

On fighting Islamist terror, we and the Russians agree.

Five years ago, Russia alerted us that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had become a violent radical Islamist. That was a year and a half before Tsarnaev carried out the Boston Marathon bombing.

But upon what authority did The Washington Post reveal code-word intelligence secrets? Where in the Constitution or U.S. law did the Post get the right to reveal state secrets every U.S. citizen is duty bound to protect?

The source of this top secret laptop-bomb leak that the Post published had to be someone in the intel community who was violating an oath that he had sworn to protect U.S. secrets, and committing a felony by leaking that secret.

Those who leaked this to hurt Trump, and those who published this in the belief it would hurt Trump, sees themselves as the "Resistance" - like the French Resistance to Vichy in World War II.

And they seemingly see themselves as above the laws that bind the rest of us.

"Can Donald Trump Be Trusted With State Secrets?" asked the headline on the editorial in The New York Times.

One wonders: Are these people oblivious to their own past?

In 1971, The New York Times published a hoard of secret documents from the Kennedy-Johnson years on Vietnam. Editors spent months arranging them to convince the public it had been lied into a war that the Times itself had supported, but had turned against.

Purpose of publication: Damage and discredit the war effort, now that Richard Nixon was commander in chief. This was tantamount to treason in wartime.

When Nixon went to the Supreme Court to halt publication of the Pentagon Papers until we could review them to ensure that sources and methods were not being compromised, the White House was castigated for failing to understand the First Amendment.

And for colluding with the thieves that stole them, and for publishing the secret documents, the Times won a Pulitzer.

Forty years ago, the Post also won a Pulitzer - for Watergate. The indispensable source of its stories was FBI Deputy Director Mark Felt, who repeatedly violated his oath and broke the law by leaking the contents of confidential FBI interviews and grand jury testimony.

Felt, "Deep Throat," was a serial felon. He could have spent 10 years in a federal penitentiary had his identity been revealed. But to protect him from being prosecuted and sent to prison, and to protect themselves from the public knowing their scoops were handed to them by a corrupt FBI agent, the Post kept Felt's identity secret for 30 years. Yet, their motto is "Democracy Dies in Darkness."

Which brings us to the point.

The adversary press asserts in its actions a right to collude with and shelter disloyal and dishonorable officials who violate our laws by leaking secrets that they are sworn to protect.

Why do these officials become criminals, and why do the mainstream media protect them? Because this seedy bargain is the best way to advance their common interests. The media get the stolen goods to damage Trump. Anti-Trump officials get their egos massaged, their agendas advanced and their identities protected. This is the corrupt bargain the Beltway press has on offer.

For the media, bringing down Trump is also good for business. TV ratings of anti-Trump media are soaring. The "failing New York Times" has seen a surge in circulation. The Pulitzers are beckoning. And bringing down a president is exhilarating. As Ben Bradlee reportedly said during the Iran-Contra scandal that was wounding President Reagan, "We haven't had this much fun since Watergate."

When Nixon was brought down, North Vietnam launched a spring offensive that overran the South, and led to concentration camps and mass executions of our allies, South Vietnamese boat people perishing by the thousands in the South China Sea, and a holocaust in Cambodia.

When Trump gets home from his trip, he should direct Justice to establish an office inside the FBI to investigate all illegal leaks since his election and all security leaks that are de facto felonies, and name a special prosecutor to head up the investigation.

Then he should order that prosecutor to determine if any Trump associates, picked up by normal security surveillance, were unmasked, and had their names and conversations spread through the intel community, on the orders of Susan Rice and Barack Obama, to seed the bureaucracy to sabotage the Trump presidency before it began.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

Cyrano , May 23, 2017 at 6:39 am GMT

If the Americans let the deep state bamboozle them into removing Trump, they don't deserve to have not only a democracy, but a country as well. Who in their right mind would believe that Trump is in cahoots with the Russians? Maybe decades of (successful even if poorly constructed) propaganda has lowered the threshold of creativity needed in order for a lie to pass as truth, but this is going beyond the limits of tolerance. Not even a 5th grader would buy into this nonsense. The deep state is damaging the reputation of US in the world by trying to get away with such poorly constructed fabrications. This is an insult to all Americans. The deep state should be forced at least to come up with something more intelligent if they want to accomplish what they are aiming for – removal of Trump.

englishmike , May 23, 2017 at 10:01 am GMT

When Trump gets home from his trip, he should direct Justice to establish an office inside the FBI to investigate all illegal leaks since his election and all security leaks that are de facto felonies, and name a special prosecutor to head up the investigation.

Then he should order that prosecutor to determine if any Trump associates, picked up by normal security surveillance, were unmasked, and had their names and conversations spread through the intel community, on the orders of Susan Rice and Barack Obama, to seed the bureaucracy to sabotage the Trump presidency before it began.

And now that it is becoming impossible to avoid the conclusion that Seth Rich was murdered for sharing over 44,000 DNC e-mails with Wikileaks (the leaks stopped when Rich died), should the office proposed by Mr Buchanan also investigate the strong possibility that the "Russian hacking" fake news story has been a deliberate, traitorous attempt to undermine a legitimately elected president of of the United States of America?

Ludwig Watzal , Website May 23, 2017 at 10:40 am GMT

The conspiracy against a just elected US president by his predecessor, the Democratic Party, the so-called liberal media and large parts of the GOP is unprecedented in American history. The media prostitutes publish stories based on anonymous sources, and everybody takes them for the truth. On can call such report unfounded rumors. Nobody should take them seriously.

With the Russian spin, the so-called liberal establishment landed an unprecedented coup. It was made up by the Dems and the Obama in the background, to tie President Trump's hand and bring him in the confrontation with the Russians. The US "Deep State" needs a bogeyman to enrich themselves by producing weapons.

One is surprised that the Trump Administration allows playing a cat-and-mouse game with it. They should crack down on the FBI internal structure and get after the leaks. Trump should be as merciless as Obama was with the whistleblowers. Perhaps he should be even harder because all of the people had top security clearance. That means, they committed a felony.

KenH , May 23, 2017 at 11:13 am GMT

Like Pat said last week, Trump needs to start going on offense. If Trump thinks he can charm the deep state by not hitting back at them then he's the wrong guy for the job.

But if and when Trump ever goes after Susan Rice and Hussein O then Mad Maxine WaWa, the DNC and the media predictably will accuse him of racism. But it wasn't racist for two black government officials to illegally wiretap Trump and his associates or decrypt their communications.

Longfisher , May 23, 2017 at 12:27 pm GMT

I can't help but agree with Pat on this one.

If Trump doesn't soon show his normally aggressive, combative and take no prisoners approach to life he's soon done.

More time in the oven doesn't improve upon done.

LF

Veritatis , May 23, 2017 at 12:29 pm GMT

"When Trump gets home from his trip, he should direct Justice to establish an office inside the FBI to investigate all illegal leaks since his election and all security leaks that are de facto felonies, and name a special prosecutor to head up the investigation."

I get the impression he just doesn't know he can do this. His advisors apparently do not either. He does not have a good understanding of the powers of his office, how to leverage it and thus cannot "execute". He has not been able to identify "a move" that will neutralize at least some key enemies, make the others pause and give him some initiative. Buchanan's advise sounds good, but there's a window of opportunity for these things.

And I cannot forget the delay of the TV stations in calling the election on the night of nov 8, and how when he came out his words were "complicated business, folks", and de facto exonerated Hillary Clinton. Some "understanding" was brokered there, and the measure of the man taken.

exiled off mainstreet , May 23, 2017 at 3:06 pm GMT

Buchanan has it right again. The whole special counsel thing is another deep state initiative to eliminate Trump, as are the continual leaks. I'm also afraid that the cynical manoevrings with the Saudis is, in large part, an effort by Trump to show he can be part of the imperialist team after all despite his earlier statements critical of Saudi-financed jihadi type thugs.

But this is a futile effort. The structure will never be satisfied until they have a pliable tool of their imperialist anti-Russian pro-Jihadi line running the show. Mike Whitney has accurately described this Rosenstein-Mueller effort in his most recent counterpunch piece (not here yet but probably to appear later today on Unz.)

The early comments on this are great. I agree with English Mike's prescription of an office to link the disloyal activities of the leakers with facts necessary to prove the Seth Rich murder and its links to the wikileaks incident. I agree with the others who indicate that a stronger line must be taken with those who, in light of the indications of the Rich story which totally debunks the Russian conspiracy theory, that the situation here indicates that the power structure is engaged on full-on treason and sedition. The success of this treason would mean the final burial of the rule of law in the US and its replacement with an imperial system totally bent on absolute domination of everywhere even if the imposition of such a system requires nuclear armageddon.

englishmike , May 23, 2017 at 4:52 pm GMT

@exiled off mainstreet Buchanan has it right again. The whole special counsel thing is another deep state initiative to eliminate Trump, as are the continual leaks. I'm also afraid that the cynical manoevrings with the Saudis is, in large part, an effort by Trump to show he can be part of the imperialist team after all despite his earlier statements critical of Saudi-financed jihadi type thugs.

But this is a futile effort. The structure will never be satisfied until they have a pliable tool of their imperialist anti-Russian pro-Jihadi line running the show. Mike Whitney has accurately described this Rosenstein-Mueller effort in his most recent counterpunch piece (not here yet but probably to appear later today on Unz.)

The early comments on this are great. I agree with English Mike's prescription of an office to link the disloyal activities of the leakers with facts necessary to prove the Seth Rich murder and its links to the wikileaks incident. I agree with the others who indicate that a stronger line must be taken with those who, in light of the indications of the Rich story which totally debunks the Russian conspiracy theory, that the situation here indicates that the power structure is engaged on full-on treason and sedition. The success of this treason would mean the final burial of the rule of law in the US and its replacement with an imperial system totally bent on absolute domination of everywhere even if the imposition of such a system requires nuclear armageddon.

englishmike , May 23, 2017 at 4:59 pm GMT

@englishmike When Trump gets home from his trip, he should direct Justice to establish an office inside the FBI to investigate all illegal leaks since his election and all security leaks that are de facto felonies, and name a special prosecutor to head up the investigation.

Then he should order that prosecutor to determine if any Trump associates, picked up by normal security surveillance, were unmasked, and had their names and conversations spread through the intel community, on the orders of Susan Rice and Barack Obama, to seed the bureaucracy to sabotage the Trump presidency before it began.

And now that it is becoming impossible to avoid the conclusion that Seth Rich was murdered for sharing over 44,000 DNC e-mails with Wikileaks (the leaks stopped when Rich died), should the office proposed by Mr Buchanan also investigate the strong possibility that the "Russian hacking" fake news story has been a deliberate, traitorous attempt to undermine a legitimately elected president of of the United States of America?

Don Bass , May 23, 2017 at 5:29 pm GMT

What Trump told Lavrov had ALREADY been printed in US newspapers some months PRIOR . The Russians can read _ they can even read English! This is what Lavrov responded to question at a media conference:

LAVROV:

We read in your newspapers that the main accusations are centered on the following: allegedly, secrets were divulged regarding terrorists' ability to put "undetectable" explosives into computers, laptops, iPads and so on.

If memory serves, maybe one or two months earlier, the Trump administration instituted a laptop ban for passengers from seven Middle Eastern countries, if I am not mistaken, which was directly connected to a terrorist threat. So if you are talking about that, I don't see what the secret is.

http://www.mid.ru/en/web/guest/meropriyatiya_s_uchastiem_ministra/-/asset_publisher/xK1BhB2bUjd3/content/id/2761442

Ma Laoshi , May 23, 2017 at 5:34 pm GMT

Sorry Mr. Buchanan, I sometimes appreciate your contrarian opinions, but you don't help your case by making some kind of martyr out of Nixon. Maybe he was also bound by laws and an oath of his own, and lying to his country to prolong a pointless, genocidal, and unwinnable war was not the way to go about it. If, two generations later, Republicans still cannot take responsibility for Nixon's blatant criminality, that may explain much of the immaturity currently emanating from the White House.

Yes, Trump could go on the offensive vs the leakers. And/or, he could reach out to Bernie's voters, who got shafted by their own party, and explain how the same thing would have happened to their guy if he'd won. Or, make some space in his cabinet for people who are not Wall-Street/Pentagon crooks. Or, you know, do *anything* else useful or tell the truth about *anything* .

The evidence is that his passion lies elsewhere. His team's counterattack is focused on Wikileaks, immigrants, and Iran–parties without power in Washington. Trump's always mostly just been a different faction of the establishment, and this holds double for the people who funded him. "Locking her up" would imply a big obligation to do better himself. With Barbie Trump already pocketing Saudi cash Hillary-style, it seems we can forget about that.

bjondo , May 23, 2017 at 5:38 pm GMT

PB, invite yourself to the Oval Office. Let the pres know what he can do.
Remind Trump Guantanamo still open for guests.

anon , May 23, 2017 at 7:36 pm GMT

Rosenstein- does he have the power to ask Mueller to look into the allegations ? Who gave them the power? How does he decide? What is his legal basis to appoint Mueller?

exiled off mainstreet , May 23, 2017 at 10:08 pm GMT

@Ma Laoshi Sorry Mr. Buchanan, I sometimes appreciate your contrarian opinions, but you don't help your case by making some kind of martyr out of Nixon. Maybe he was also bound by laws and an oath of his own, and lying to his country to prolong a pointless, genocidal, and unwinnable war was not the way to go about it. If, two generations later, Republicans still cannot take responsibility for Nixon's blatant criminality, that may explain much of the immaturity currently emanating from the White House.

Yes, Trump could go on the offensive vs the leakers. And/or, he could reach out to Bernie's voters, who got shafted by their own party, and explain how the same thing would have happened to their guy if he'd won. Or, make some space in his cabinet for people who are not Wall-Street/Pentagon crooks. Or, you know, do *anything* else useful or tell the truth about *anything*.

The evidence is that his passion lies elsewhere. His team's counterattack is focused on Wikileaks, immigrants, and Iran--parties without power in Washington. Trump's always mostly just been a different faction of the establishment, and this holds double for the people who funded him. "Locking her up" would imply a big obligation to do better himself. With Barbie Trump already pocketing Saudi cash Hillary-style, it seems we can forget about that.

Minnesota Mary , May 24, 2017 at 1:04 am GMT

@bjondo PB, invite yourself to the Oval Office. Let the pres know what he can do.
Remind Trump Guantanamo still open for guests.

Ma Laoshi , May 24, 2017 at 4:44 am GMT

@exiled off mainstreet While I don't always agree with Buchanan on Nixon, I can remember his historical role as Nixon's adviser, and Nixon does not look as bad as he looked to me then based upon what has happened in the last 45 years. His failure was keeping the war going, but his Russian and Chinese policies were positive, and his domestic policy seems positively leftwing by modern standards. Unfortunately, Trump has not shown any gratitude towards wikileaks, perhaps as a result of the campaign against him.

I think the Seth Rich story needs to be fully investigated, and, even if the Kim Dotcom story was phony, the Rich thing looks real if based only on the reaction to it by the power structure.

MarkinLA , May 24, 2017 at 2:10 pm GMT

@Cyrano If the Americans let the deep state bamboozle them into removing Trump, they don't deserve to have not only a democracy, but a country as well. Who in their right mind would believe that Trump is in cahoots with the Russians? Maybe decades of (successful even if poorly constructed) propaganda has lowered the threshold of creativity needed in order for a lie to pass as truth, but this is going beyond the limits of tolerance. Not even a 5th grader would buy into this nonsense. The deep state is damaging the reputation of US in the world by trying to get away with such poorly constructed fabrications. This is an insult to all Americans. The deep state should be forced at least to come up with something more intelligent if they want to accomplish what they are aiming for - removal of Trump.

englishmike , May 24, 2017 at 8:36 pm GMT

Vox Day at his "Vox Popoli" site has drawn attention to a powerful piece on Jerry Pournelle's "Chaos Manor" site about what James Comey has (allegedly) actually been doing at the FBI and how Trump is (allegedly) very much on the case. Whether or not you are convinced, it is required reading for anyone following this thread. Here's an excerpt:

If Hillary had won, Comey would have kept right on providing cover for the corruption of the Clinton machine. He would have kept the FBI paralyzed, prevented the Clinton Fund from being investigated, and continued to do his job as the Clinton's personal scandal eraser at the FBI.
BUT TRUMP WON.
The Swamp and its bottom-dwelling denizens realize they are at risk from this political outsider who is not connected to the uni-party machines. Before Trump takes office, a "failsafe" plan is implemented to ruin Trump's administration and try to force him out of the Presidency. The key players committed to the plan are the democrat politicians, the RINO establishment, the media, the Obama-Clinton operatives imbedded throughout the intelligence agencies and the entire bureaucracy, and most importantly, the Obama DOJ and JAMES COMEY. The scheme is to smear Trump with Russian "connections," through a fake FBI "investigation" and more importantly, to trap him into a charge of criminal interference with the FBI. COMEY IS THE CENTRAL FIGURE IN THE SCHEME TO TAKE DOWN TRUMP.

Veritatis , May 24, 2017 at 10:47 pm GMT

@englishmike Vox Day at his "Vox Popoli" site has drawn attention to a powerful piece on Jerry Pournelle's "Chaos Manor" site about what James Comey has (allegedly) actually been doing at the FBI and how Trump is (allegedly) very much on the case. Whether or not you are convinced, it is required reading for anyone following this thread. Here's an excerpt:

If Hillary had won, Comey would have kept right on providing cover for the corruption of the Clinton machine. He would have kept the FBI paralyzed, prevented the Clinton Fund from being investigated, and continued to do his job as the Clinton's personal scandal eraser at the FBI.

BUT TRUMP WON.

The Swamp and its bottom-dwelling denizens realize they are at risk from this political outsider who is not connected to the uni-party machines. Before Trump takes office, a "failsafe" plan is implemented to ruin Trump's administration and try to force him out of the Presidency. The key players committed to the plan are the democrat politicians, the RINO establishment, the media, the Obama-Clinton operatives imbedded throughout the intelligence agencies and the entire bureaucracy, and most importantly, the Obama DOJ and JAMES COMEY. The scheme is to smear Trump with Russian "connections," through a fake FBI "investigation" and more importantly, to trap him into a charge of criminal interference with the FBI. COMEY IS THE CENTRAL FIGURE IN THE SCHEME TO TAKE DOWN TRUMP.

[May 21, 2017] Do High-Level Leaks Suggest a Conspiracy by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... I now suspect that there is indeed a group at the top of the U.S. national security system that wants to remove Donald Trump and has wanted to do so for quite some time. ..."
"... Their program is simple: convince the nation that the president and his team colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election in his favor, which, if demonstrable even if not necessarily true, would provide grounds for impeachment. They are motivated by the belief that removing Trump must be done "for the good of the country" and they are willing to do what they consider correcting a mistake made by the American voters. They are assisted in their effort by the mainstream media, which agrees with both the methods employed and the overall objective and is completely on board with the process. ..."
"... Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest. ..."
"... "Perhaps if the man could inspire loyalty in his troops this problem would never exist." Yes–a leader must *inspire* loyalty, not demand it over dinner at the White House. ..."
May 18, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
National-security officials may see themselves as patriots, but their methods set a dangerous precedent.

Back in my time in the CIA, there were two places in the headquarters building one could go that were free speech zones-places where it was safe to vent about senior management without necessarily being admonished or even reported. They were the Historical Intelligence Collection room off the library, where no one ever went to look at the books, and the office supplies storage room in the basement. The supplies room had a lot of dark corners and concealing shelves where it was possible to be anonymous and it was completely unsupervised in the belief that true-blue CIA officers would never stoop to taking even a single pencil more than was actually needed to get the job done.

I don't know if those rooms still exist, but I sometimes think of them when the subject of government conspiracies come up. I have this vision of two or three conspirators huddled in the corner behind the staplers back in 1975 discussing how one would go about eliminating the likes of Senator Frank Church, who at that time was heading a major congressional investigation into CIA improprieties.

If there had been such a gathering, I would imagine that the Washington Post would have found out about it on the next day as intelligence officers are gregarious and like to talk. This has been my principal problem with the debate in some quarters about the 9/11 Commission. Their report did indeed miss many important angles in order to protect certain governmental interests, but if there had been a genuine conspiracy involving what must have been hundreds of people to demolish the Twin Towers with explosives, it surely would have leaked long ago.

Two months ago, I would have dismissed as fantasy any thoughts of a conspiracy based in America's national security agencies to bring down Donald Trump. But now I am not so sure. Many of my friends who are former intelligence officers are increasingly asking questions. It is worth pointing out that none of us are fans of what the White House has been doing and saying-quite the contrary. Still, alerting the country to concerns over what might be a developing soft coup orchestrated by the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to nullify the results of a national election in no way equates to trying to protect Donald Trump and his uncouth and ill-informed behavior. It is rather a defense of the Constitution.

Donald Trump said on Wednesday that "This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!" He might be right. He was referring to Deputy Attorney General Rob Rosenstein's appointment of the highly-respected Robert Mueller as independent counsel to investigate "any links and/or coordination between Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump, and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

Trump's bombast puts everyone but his most tone-deaf supporters on edge, but there are two points that he has been making repeatedly that are essential to any understanding of what is going on. First, the investigation into Russia and the Trumpsters has been a high priority at FBI and also in Congress for nearly a year. Yet so far no one has produced evidence that anyone broke any law or even that someone did something wrong. Second, and more importantly, the vilification of Trump and Russia has been driven by a series of leaks that come from the very top of the national security apparatus, leaks that appear not to have been seriously investigated.

This involvement of FBI and CIA in the campaign, whether inadvertently or by design, was particularly evident in the various reports that surfaced and were leaked to the press during the campaign and right up to the inauguration. The leaks of that type of information, to include technical intelligence and Special Access Program "codeword" material, require top-level access as well as the ability to arrange clandestine contacts with major players in the media, something far beyond the reach of most employees at CIA or the FBI.

Similar leaks have been appearing since that time. I confess to finding Monday's detailed account of what President Trump discussed with Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov, which included corroborating material that likely did more damage than the information that was actually shared, highly suggestive of the possibility that something like a conspiracy is, in fact, functioning. Given the really tight-security control of that transcript after it was determined that it contained sensitive information, one might reasonably assume that the leaks to the media came directly out of Donald Trump's own National Security Council or from the highest levels of the office of the DNI, CIA, or FBI.

Yesterday, the anonymous sources struck again, revealing that "Michael Flynn and other advisers to Donald Trump's campaign were in contact with Russian officials and others with Kremlin ties in at least 18 calls and emails during the last seven months of the 2016 presidential race." That sort of information had to come from the top level of the FBI and would have been accessible to only a few, but even though the leaks of what constitutes highly-classified information have been recurring for many months, no one has been fired or arrested.

The emphasis on Russia derives from the government and media consensus that Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic National Committee (DNC) computers that led to the exposure of what the DNC was doing to destroy the candidacy of Bernie Sanders. There is also a related consensus that the Russian hacking was intended to damage American democracy and also to help the Trump campaign, a narrative that the president has described as a "made-up thing," a view that I share. All of these assertions are regarded as unquestionably true as measured by inside-the-beltway groupthink, with even the White House now conceding that there was Russian interference in the election.

Sometimes the hysteria over Russia produces over-the-top stories in the mainstream media, including last week's completely speculative piece wondering whether the entourage of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had sought to sneak a recording device into the White House during his White House visit. It was the type of tale that might have been inspired by a leak from someone in the National Security Council who personally observed the context of the meeting and was able to provide corroborating details.

Nevertheless, in spite of the overwhelming groupthink, it has been repeated ad nauseam by people like myself that no actual evidence has been produced to support any of the claims being made about Russia and Trump. There is more evidence that the White House was penetrated by Ankara-through the good services of Michael Flynn-than by Moscow, but Congress has not called for an investigation into Turkey's lobbying . Ray McGovern, a former senior CIA analyst, is even speculating that the Agency might have been the actual hacker into the DNC, leaving a trail behind that would have suggested that it was done by the Russians. His concern arises from the recent WikiLeaks revelation that the CIA had developed cyberwarfare capabilities to do just that.

McGovern, like myself, is also asking why former CIA Director John Brennan has not been summoned by the Senate Committee looking into Russia-gate. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has testified twice, while former FBI Director James Comey, current NSA Director Mike Rogers, and former Justice Department senior official Sally Yates have all appeared once. Brennan's absence is conspicuous as he was the senior national security official most closely tied to the Obama Administration, may have had the tools at hand to fake the Russian connection, and has also been plausibly linked to "encouraging" British Intelligence to provide damaging information on Michael Flynn.

I now suspect that there is indeed a group at the top of the U.S. national security system that wants to remove Donald Trump and has wanted to do so for quite some time. If that is true, I believe that they have been operating with that goal in mind for at least the past year. It is not a traditional conspiracy or cabal in that it does not meet and conspire together, but I suspect the members know what they are doing in a general sense and are intervening whenever they can to keep Trump off balance. Their program is simple: convince the nation that the president and his team colluded with the Russians to rig the 2016 election in his favor, which, if demonstrable even if not necessarily true, would provide grounds for impeachment. They are motivated by the belief that removing Trump must be done "for the good of the country" and they are willing to do what they consider correcting a mistake made by the American voters. They are assisted in their effort by the mainstream media, which agrees with both the methods employed and the overall objective and is completely on board with the process.

Saving the country from Trump is certainly an attractive notion. I suspect the Comeys, Clappers, and Brennans, together with a host of former senior officers who appear regularly on television, if they were involved, see themselves as great patriots. But they must understand that the blunt instrument they are usingis far more dangerous than the current occupant of the White House. A soft coup engineered by the national security and intelligence agencies would be far more threatening to our democracy than anything Donald Trump or even the Russians can do.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

  • Whine Merchant , says: May 18, 2017 at 10:20 pm
    I suggest that there are too many big egos involved to keep any 'conspiracy' quiet for long. Someone would post a status update on Facebook, with a photo tagging them all in their cloaks, brandishing daggers.
    Fran Macadam , says: May 18, 2017 at 11:22 pm
    Nothing could be more obvious than that the particular anonymous high level Deep State bureaucrats and the media that quotes them are attempting a coup.

    Many of us have suspected we have been progressively disenfranchised, both economically and politically, by elite special interests for some time. If this oligarchy now get the coup they want, they will then have proven to most of us that democracy in America is a sham, no more than a cynical rigged show to deceive us that we the people are in control.

    John_M , says: May 18, 2017 at 11:38 pm
    No conspiracy is required. Trump went out of his way to antagonize the staff at CIA headquarters when he visited. We don't need to discuss how the 'Orange Blob' (As I understand he is frequently referred to within the FBI) antagonized the FBI.

    Leaks are endemic in DC. To have gone out of his way to antagonize the intelligence and security apparatus is the sign of a dangerous incompetent.

    I expect the agencies to back to their old tricks / policies with respect to senate approvals – providing useful (damaging) background information on candidates they do not approve of to political opponents in the Senate.

    But no conspiracy is required at all – just bureaucrats with information using it in what they take to be their organizational interest.

    It has been so for a long time. You get less of it with competent leadership – and more with incompetent leadership.

    Marcion , says: May 18, 2017 at 11:38 pm
    If the President hasn't done anything wrong, what does he have to hide?
    JLF , says: May 18, 2017 at 11:53 pm
    Proof? Evidence? The absence of proof is proof of nothing.
    So, smoking gun . . . or smoking pipe?
    Joe the Plutocrat , says: May 19, 2017 at 12:00 am
    fascinating stuff. which begs the question, where is the betting line or over/under for civil servants (especially those employed in the intelligence/national security space), between a sworn oath to protect and defend the Constitution (via a 'conspiracy', which could also be described as a necessary and authorized 'operation'), and an a POTUS who despite his similar oath f office, lacks the capacity (legal, intellectual, emotional) ability to honor his oath? frankly, I'll take the "deep state" underdogs and the points.
    Uzback , says: May 19, 2017 at 12:37 am
    If you really are concerned that the Intelligence Agencies are leaking to damage Trump then Trump needs to take advantage of his own resources and be more open about his information to take away their power.
    1. He needs to release his tax returns. This is incredibly important, and if he is hiding something then the IC has leverage in circumstantial evidence. If there is nothing there, then they lose power.
    2. Be in full support of any investigation. Let Flynn and others from the White House speak to Congress. Again, the leaks have no power if you already release information.
    3. Instead of putting out obvious lies like Spicer did on January 21st or misdirecting information, be as open as possible on basic things. Talk to the American people like the adults they are.
    4. Stop Tweeting. Full stop. No more, it just leads to bad things.

    The leaks work because knowledge is power, and this Administration is thinking that by not giving a straight answer they can control the knowledge, which is completely not true.

    DonChi , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:14 am
    Many smart, good, fair people have such a visceral dislike of Trump that they lose their virtues and succumb to hysteria. But it's worse than that. Blindly supporting a soft coup is morally tantamount to treason.

    I know it's hard to swallow–because you hate Donald Trump so much–but it's true.

    Johnny F. Ive , says: May 19, 2017 at 6:35 am
    "Saving the country from Trump is certainly an attractive notion. I suspect the Comeys, Clappers, and Brennans, together with a host of former senior officers who appear regularly on television, if they were involved, see themselves as great patriots."

    They must be out of touch with reality. If they were patriots they would have got rid of Bush II and Cheney before the Iraq War of 2003! This is just to keep the American Empire on its present course of decline. There is no sign of anything noble going on here.

    Centralist , says: May 19, 2017 at 7:18 am
    I think the majority of the so called conspiracies are individuals or small groups operating on their own with a common goal without any active cooperation mainly because they know talking about it will lead to them facing greater problems later on.

    The majority of the leakers are likely people that honestly believe they are doing the right thing and act on it. It is not like people go into the Intelligence or Law Enforcement because they are anti-authority. They are normally men and women with a dedication to the United States and its principles so when they feel other are violating that they act. For many Trump while he is the President fails to act as such and not only that has called in to question the competency of these people and their loyalty. After having read "The Art of the Deal" I am surprised he has not tried to be more vicious to these people. Trump has a strong streak of personal loyalty and from what I gather only believes in it. The Men and Women that make up the Law Enforcement and Intelligence do not give up personal loyalty to one politician or one faction they are loyal to the United States. This is something a man who has only ever worked in family business does not seem capable to understand. His experience and training always taught him if you work for him you are suppose to be loyal to him. That is not how these organizations operate. The "deep state" is more reflective of our own polarization along party and ideologue lines. The fact an organization can people that work both sides seems crazy to many that only operate in left or right no middle. I in sad to say the longer I am alive the more I think the draft is needed not because of the need for soldiers but rather for the propose of forcing people to work in an organization that is dedicated to a common goal with individuals from all over the nation with different beliefs and experiences. Otherwise we are just going to have people that are stuck and leading to further divisions. As a note I have never served in the military my jr year of college I received an injury that disqualified me from service. I attended though one of the six senior military colleges with the intention of serving.

    John S , says: May 19, 2017 at 7:39 am
    Is this the same Philip Giraldi who has written odes to Wikileaks? Public has a right to know,etc.?
    Kurt Gayle , says: May 19, 2017 at 7:53 am
    Philip Giraldi "I now suspect that there is indeed a group at the top of the U.S. national security system that wants to remove Donald Trump and has wanted to do so for quite some time. If that is true, I believe that they have been operating with that goal in mind for at least the past year."

    Decades-long Princeton/NYU Professor of Russian studies Stephen Cohen agrees with Mr. Giraldi's assessment (May 15, Fox):

    If you had asked me a few days ago "What's the number one threat to the United States today?" I would have said, "International terrorism." Today I would say, "It's this assault on President Trump." Because it's been going on a year. And can we be clear? What he's being accused of is treason. This has never happened in America – that there's a Russian agent in the White House. And we've had a whole array of allegations: From Putin helped him get in the White House, to his associates are doing wrong things with Russians, that Flynn did something wrong – his former National Security Advisor – did something wrong in talking to the Russian ambassador. There's no evidence that there was any wrong-doing and, indeed, Flynn should have talked to the Russian ambassador. That was his job. So, this is beyond belief now and has become – by this I mean this assault on Trump and his loyalty – this has become a national security threat to us in-itself There has long been in Washington a powerful – let's call it The Fourth Branch of Government, the intelligence services, who have opposed any rapprochement or cooperation with Russia. Remember, in 2016 President Obama worked out a deal with President Putin for military cooperation in Syria. He said he was going to share intelligence with Russia – just the way Trump and the Russians were supposed to do the other day. Our Department of Defense said it wouldn't share intelligence. And a few days later, they killed Syrian soldiers, violating the agreement, and that was the end of that. So, we can ask: "Who is making our foreign policy in Washington today?" Are there really three branches of government, or is there a fourth branch of government – these intel services? What we know as a fact is that Obama tried – not very hard, but he tried – for a military alliance with Putin in Syria against terrorism, and it was sabotaged by the Department of Defense and its allies in the intelligence services. Trump says, he said on the campaign trail: "Wouldn't it be great to cooperate with Russian?" My answer is: It would be great. And Trump seems to want that to happen. But he's being thwarted. Every time he gets close, we get a new leak, of a story.

    Chris Chuba , says: May 19, 2017 at 8:20 am
    I'm certain that everyone who launched a coup in a third world country thought they were patriots as well. The comment 'if he has nothing to hide is chilling' because it ignores the nature of these attacks. These are not really leaks, they are anonymous hit and run attacks designed to leave an impression in a way that is impossible to refute.

    Some examples
    1. CIA leak, 'portions of the Russian Dossier have been confirmed'. Perhaps some trivial facts were confirmed but people will think of the sensational parts of the dossier.

    2. Mattis flat out denies that 'methods and sources' were given to the Russians but the leaker gives specifics to the MSM. Perhaps the leaker, knowing the topic of the meeting went above and beyond knowing that the WH is not going to give out a full transcript of the meeting.

    These guys are playing a very dangerous game. This is the same CIA group that is arming rebels in Syria. They know better than us. Anyone who questions them is a traitor in their eyes.

    G Harvey , says: May 19, 2017 at 8:51 am
    The answer is: Yes.

    Paul Craig Roberts has an article up that I think should be read. As I do not know if this site allows the posting of links or even article names, I will provide neither.

    Kurt Gayle , says: May 19, 2017 at 8:53 am
    Philip Giraldi "Ray McGovern, a former senior CIA analyst, is even speculating that the Agency might have been the actual hacker into the DNC, leaving a trail behind that would have suggested that it was done by the Russians. His concern arises from the recent Wiki Leaks revelation that the CIA had developed cyber warfare capabilities to do just that. McGovern, like myself, is also asking why former CIA Director John Brennan has not been summoned by the Senate Committee looking into Russia-gate. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has testified twice, while former FBI Director James Comey, current NSA Director Mike Rogers, and former Justice Department senior official Sally Yates have all appeared once. Brennan's absence is conspicuous as he was the senior national security official most closely tied to the Obama Administration, may have had the tools at hand to fake the Russian connection, and has also been plausibly linked to 'encouraging' British Intelligence to provide damaging information on Michael Flynn."

    Brennan was chosen by Obama to head the CIA and was sworn in as Director on March 8, 2013. At the swearing-in ceremony, rather than placing his hand on a Bible, Brennan chose to place his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787. Somewhat worthy of note is the fact that the 1787 draft of the Constitution does not contain the Bill of Rights.

    But Obama White House Press spokesman Josh Earnest said Brennan requested that particular draft of the US Constitution because he "wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA."

    "Commitment to the rule of law"? Brennan?

    Vitaly , says: May 19, 2017 at 9:42 am
    The scandal in Washington, DC is profound to be explained by petty considerations. It requires metaphysical language.

    The sad fact is that We-the-People were unable to keep our Republic as Benjamin Franklin advised us to do. Founding Fathers had tried hard to protect Republic against mob. The last thing they could imagine was that mentality of instant gratification that define mob will morph into top echelon of ruling class. If history provide any lessons the first was given by Moses when he descended from Mount Sinai with 10 commandments. That lesson was repeated multiple times with the same results. History is littered with faded memories of failed empires, which reduced multidimensional colored world to lust for Golden Calf. Under no circumstances the US will be exception for signs of decay are everywhere.
    I am also sure that majority of commentators on this "conservative" site are to busy with trivia to comprehend reality they are facing in very near future.

    p3cop , says: May 19, 2017 at 9:45 am
    How is it that the leakers are not identified, fired and prosecuted? When there are five people in a room when a secret is told, and that secret gets leaked, one of those five people are guilty. If you can't tell which one, fire them all. Are there no detectives in D.C.? It ain't rocket science.
    Dan Green , says: May 19, 2017 at 10:32 am
    I think we should be reminded , as we witness this circus. Those thousands who work in the swamp, are experts at what they do. I would admit Trump needs to slack off his rhetoric, but I have to hand it to the Democrats. Getting Trump impeached or to resign is their new platform to get the ruling class back in the saddle.
    Joe the Plutocrat , says: May 19, 2017 at 11:24 am
    @Dan Green, maybe so, but the real question is, why did Americans elect a POTUS who is NOT an "expert" at what the POTUS does? Deep State, Establishment, or whatever you title you choose, one does not survive in a swamp without mastering or adapting the skills necessary to this may sound silly, survive in a swamp. This is the difference between fake news and real news. This is the difference between television and reality television. And finally, this is the difference between a true populist, and a self-described 'billionaire' populist – who inherited millions and grew it (sic) to billions via debt and bankruptcy. None of this should surprise Americans, progressive or 'deplorable'. It certainly did not surprise those sworn to defend the Constitution.
    Adriana I Pena , says: May 19, 2017 at 11:45 am
    They say that extraordinary circumstances make bad law.

    But extraordinary circumstances have to be addressed.

    A man-child with no impulse control in charge of foreign policy and they nuclear arsenal qualifies as extraordinary circumstances.

    As Cavafy said "the gods should have bothered"

    Johann , says: May 19, 2017 at 11:48 am
    The leaks are selective dirty trick mountain-out-of-molehill spoil sport partisan cry baby sore loser propaganda. If they are successful in circumventing our democracy, they and all of us will reap the whirlwind.
    bkh , says: May 19, 2017 at 12:12 pm
    I hope so! We need a good shake-up in DC to save TV ratings and sell papers. Can also add all the advertising dollars available with media clicks. And the hostility and deadlock has to continue so we can slip through some wonderful legislation to take away more wealth and rights from the dumb sheep on both sides. I am sure NetFlix or Amazon or some other Cable channel can't wait for the rights to this. "Orange is the New Nixon"

    They got it figured out to where they can get the SJWs and the left to turn out for the death of the right. They will then turn the guns on "their own" because those sheep are just as deplorable. Burn it down! Tear it apart! Show your true selves for the devils you are.

    P Tocco , says: May 19, 2017 at 12:34 pm
    Today's soft coup plotters may indeed be breaking the law. Didn't American colonial coup plotters also break the law? I.e. Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Paine, all committed hanging offenses. We are in their debt.
    Brian W , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:05 pm
    14.05.2017 International Cyber Attack: Roots Traced to US National Security Agency

    Over 45,000 ransomware attacks have been tracked in large-scale attacks across Europe and Asia - particularly Russia and China - as well as attacks in the US and South America.

    http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/05/14/international-cyber-attack-roots-traced-us-national-security-agency.html

    Iron Felix , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:20 pm
    The US is effectively an empire, not a republic. Empires are always fighting wars to maintain and expand. Russia is viewed not as just a large influential country, but an obstacle to expansion of the empire. This is the view of the Deep State which defends the interests of the US ruling class, the finance capitalist class. It runs a worldwide imperialist system.

    Trump has no interest in empire. Sure, he will go to war against individual countries which he believes are encroaching on US interests, but he defines these interests more narrowly as the republic being cheated or taken advantage of by other states. He has no interest in sitting before a map like Halford Mackinder and moving pieces around the chess board. Trump would probably not be too interested in running off to Myanmar like Obama because it was a pawn on the geopolitical chess board.

    This is an intolerable situation for the masters of the empire. Getting rid of Trump is the solution. Pence will be the empire's servant.

    The Democrats hold contradictory views here. On the one hand, they are salivating because they believe that anyone who doesn't have Hillary Clinton's baggage they nominate for 2020 would beat Trump, so they want him wounded but still in office. Note that it was reported that some Democrats cautioned against a rush to impeachment. Pence would be a far more formidable opponent in 2020.

    The Republicans know this too. The Republican establishment would like to be rid of Trump as it considers him an albatross. They probably believe that Pence would be a stronger candidate. On the other hand, Trump is immensely popular among the Republican base. If Republican Congresspeople and Senators get on the anti-Trump bandwagon, there will be hell to pay. Trump could go around the country packing stadiums, financing primary campaigns, and maybe even run for President in 2020 as an independent or, if he is somehow disallowed because he is an impeached president, he could support a proxy. The establishment, Democrat and Republican, would be making a massive mistake underestimating Donald Trump.

    Stop the agony , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:33 pm
    This is pretty elaborate. Occam's razor dictates that the simplest explanation is typically the right one. In this case, Trump clearly treats his staff like rented mules, ritualistically ignoring their recomendations, belittling their capabilities, and throwing them under the bus whenever possible. Is it any wonder that they would leak to whomever will listen? As to the reality of the Russia conspiracy, there is a bit more evidence than Giraldi admits most glaringly in the Administration's repeated and politically inexplicable attempts to treat the Kremlin like a long and trusted ally. Also, it wasn't so much the DNC hack as the wikileaks hack that was problematic in the election. But for all that, I do agree that Flynn was clearly on the payroll of Turkey, and that he should be prosecuted accordingly. I just don't think the rest of the Administration was involved. But there is clearly more than just Flynn eating out of Putin's hand.
    Chris Chuba , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:41 pm
    It's not easy finding who leaked it because it doesn't have to be anyone who was in the room.

    The meeting transcript is archived, so who ever records the meeting, has access to the archive of the meeting, or who is in the Intel community and knows that Trump talked to the Russians about airline security could have leaked this to the press. There is also the universe of politicians if they were briefed on the meeting, but I am thinking this to be a long shot in this case.

    Brendan Sexton , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:48 pm
    Crooks and cheats always scream loudest about and direct their most intense anger at the 'squealers' who get them in trouble. (Of course it is their own behavior that gets them in trouble, really, but their egos will not allow admitting that.)

    But, any cop will tell you we would have very few successes in the justice system at all if it were not for these 'squealers." Either their direct evidence itself, or the investigative leads their information provides, make most cases, especially the cases in which there is little physical evidence.
    So it is here, with Giraldi joining in with the Trump cabal to raise a stink about the leaks and the leakers.
    Informants are very rarely seen in a positive light, even by the side using them (the cops, in my analogy), but what turns out to matter is the crime itself. In this case, maybe there is no crime–as Giraldi suggests–but to even find that out we will get there by using the info, or at least starting with the info that these leaks are providing.

    Tim D. , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:49 pm
    The U.S. isn't just governed by laws, but by norms too. Trump isn't given the benefit of the doubt not only by institutions housed within the executive branch, but by the judicial branch too. The blunt truth is people's refusal to acknowledge that Trump is unqualified for the presidency, mentally unsound, and a national security liability. What we're seeing now is how aspects of government work when confronted with such a situation.
    Robert Charron , says: May 19, 2017 at 1:57 pm
    The word "conspiracy" literally means breathing together. A conspiracy doesn't require clandestine meetings, but essentially arises from individuals "breathing" together.
    Aegis , says: May 19, 2017 at 2:05 pm
    Given that Trump's administration leaks more in one day than Obama's administration leaked in eight years we must assume that the real problem here is President Trump. Perhaps if the man could inspire loyalty in his troops this problem would never exist. Obviously numerous very powerful and knowledgeable individuals are in a panic over Trump's presidency. That is not a good sign and we all should be very worried about what is really going on in the White House.
    Brendan Sexton , says: May 19, 2017 at 3:21 pm
    Aegis puts his finger on it: "Perhaps if the man could inspire loyalty in his troops this problem would never exist." Yes–a leader must *inspire* loyalty, not demand it over dinner at the White House.

    Trump inspires, at the best, nervous regard. At the worst, worse. He is not much of a leader–rather a whiner and the like. How much loyalty would YOU pledge to a petulant five-year-old?

    KennethF , says: May 19, 2017 at 3:35 pm
    Step back for a moment. Trump is a man who, after losing the popular vote by 3 million, suddenly declares there were 3 million illegal votes for Hillary. That statement is so preposterous that it is perfectly reasonable to call it insane (yet the GOP will still form a committee to look into it). He utters many such insane statements.

    Trump clearly does not understand the Constitution that he's sworn to uphold. His ignorance and ineptitude are on the public record simply by reviewing his speeches and tweets - no mainstream media required.

    Are there so-called "Deep Staters" out to get Trump for the wrong reasons? Sure. But there are so many right reasons to get rid of him that it's safe to assume that many of the leakers are Republicans who happen to love their country more than they love their party. Cheers for everyone doing their part to prove how dangerous Trump is to national security. (With luck, someone will dig up the tax returns that he's unconscionably withheld).

    As others have said, Trump's problem is of Trump's making.

  • [May 19, 2017] The Special Counsel Comes to Town Its the Moscow Trials, Revisted by Justin Raimondo

    Robert Mueller was FBI director on September 11, 2001 (he was appointed on September 4).
    Now Russia is officially a pariah state, any contacts with Russian officials can be a career limited move.
    Notable quotes:
    "... After months of leaks coming from the intelligence agencies, who bitterly oppose the new policy, and a barrage of innuendo, smears, and character assassination in the media, the will of the people has been abrogated: the Deep State has the last word. The denizens of Langley, and the career spooks within our seventeen intelligence agencies, have exercised their veto power – a power that is not written into the Constitution, but is nevertheless very real. ..."
    "... In short, Mueller has virtually unlimited power to expand his investigation, and, given the history of Special Counsels, you can be sure that this one will wander far afield and become a general probe into "Russian influence" on the election – a matter already taken up by at least two congressional committees. ..."
    "... Any politician, especially one who supported Trump, who advocates peaceful and productive relations with Russia is a likely target. The War Party has already got Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) in its sights for his fearless questioning of the anti-Russian propaganda campaign. ..."
    May 19, 2017 | original.antiwar.com

    The Special Counsel Comes to Town: It's the Moscow Trials, Revisited

    The witch-hunt begins

    Donald Trump ran on a platform of improving relations with Russia: his victory was a mandate for that policy. Yet the real power in this country doesn't reside within the ballot box, and that reality was brought home when the Justice Department appointed a "special counsel" to investigate " any links and/or coordination with the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump ."

    After months of leaks coming from the intelligence agencies, who bitterly oppose the new policy, and a barrage of innuendo, smears, and character assassination in the media, the will of the people has been abrogated: the Deep State has the last word. The denizens of Langley, and the career spooks within our seventeen intelligence agencies, have exercised their veto power – a power that is not written into the Constitution, but is nevertheless very real.

    Their goal is to not only make détente with Russia impossible – and Trump's goal of "getting along with Russia" will surely not be implemented now that the regime of the special counsel has trumped him – but also to overthrow a democratically elected chief executive, and perhaps prosecute him for "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the process.

    No matter what you think of Trump, this is an ominous development for all those who care about the future of our republic. Because the warning to our politicians could not be clearer: So you want to effect a fundamental change in US foreign policy? You dare to question the permanence of NATO? Let this be a lesson to you.

    This goes way beyond the Trump administration: the potential targets of the investigation are potentially unlimited. Deputy Attorney General Ron Rosenstein's letter to the Special Counsel – Bush era FBI Director Robert Mueller – also states that the counsel's purview includes "any matters that arose directly from the investigation," as well as "any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR 600.4 (a) ," which refers to anyone who might conceivably be involved in obstructing the Special Counsel's probe.

    In short, Mueller has virtually unlimited power to expand his investigation, and, given the history of Special Counsels, you can be sure that this one will wander far afield and become a general probe into "Russian influence" on the election – a matter already taken up by at least two congressional committees.

    Any politician, especially one who supported Trump, who advocates peaceful and productive relations with Russia is a likely target. The War Party has already got Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) in its sights for his fearless questioning of the anti-Russian propaganda campaign.

    Furthermore, any media outlets that either supported Trump, had a good word to say about Trump, and/or dissented from the Russophobic hysteria that has gripped the "mainstream" media are liable to be scrutinized. Journalists with "Russian ties" – no matter how tenuous – will be caught up in the witch-hunt. The Washington Post gave front page prominence to a group of anonymous "researchers" that calls itself " PropOrNot ," which has compiled a lengthy list of "pro-Russian" media outlets and web sites – including the Drudge Report, and Antiwar.com.

    The dynamics of the witch-hunt will play out in the manner in which it has operated up until this point, only more so: the "mainstream" media will act as the research department of DOJ investigators, "uncovering" the "pro-Russian" network in the US, inviting Mueller to move in for the kill. Politicians, journalists, academics, and even ordinary folks will be targeted by the government in the hunt for "Putin's puppets."

    We haven't seen this kind of thing since the 1950s. Indeed, the history of these political lynchings goes all the way back to the Moscow Trials conducted by Stalin and his henchmen, who consolidated their power by prosecuting "Trotskyite wreckers" and other "enemies of the people" – to the applause of Western "liberals."

    What we are witnessing is a "regime-change" operation, such as our intelligence agencies have routinely carried out abroad, right here in the United States. Yet it is more – and worse – than that.

    This pernicious campaign is an attempt to criminalize dissent from the foreign policy "consensus." It is an effort by powerful groups within the national security bureaucracy, the media, and the military-industrial complex to stamp out any opposition to their program of perpetual war. It is, in effect, political terrorism – that is, an attempt to achieve political-ideological goals by the threat of force, i.e. the threat of State coercion. The police state methods utilized by law enforcement agencies in this country since 9/11 – universal surveillance, and the whole menu of cyber-spying techniques exposed by Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks – will be deployed. And it won't just be our own American spooks doing the eavesdropping.

    The involvement of the British and other European intelligence agencies in this regime-change operation on American soil is well-known : it was a "former" MI6 agent, one Christopher Steele , who authored and circulated the infamous "dirty dossier" on Trump. The Ukrainians, in particular, are in the forefront of this campaign: their targeting of Paul Manafort is out in the open . And a recent article in the Washington Post which relates a conversation between GOP House majority leader Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan, and others, has McCarthy saying he thinks both Trump and Rep. Rohrabacher are "paid by Putin." The exchange took place on Capitol Hill, after a meeting with the Ukrainian envoy – and the Post , in a story datelined Kiev, reports that it was "recorded." So who did the recording? My bet is on the Ukrainians.

    ... ... ...

    [May 19, 2017] Trump and the Russia leak A bogus news story spins out of control by Jay Sekulow

    May 19, 2017 | www.foxnews.com

    The truth is, what's really putting our nation is risk is the flagrant leaking from within the federal bureaucracy – those who oppose President Trump who are breaking the law when they leak classified materials.

    President Trump's critics and opponents – including many in the news media – claim this faux story about President Trump providing classified material to the Russians puts the United States at risk.

    The truth is, what's really putting our nation is risk is the flagrant leaking from within the federal bureaucracy – those who oppose President Trump who are breaking the law when they leak classified materials.

    The real story – the real crisis – is the ongoing leak of classified information. That is serious and something that the Trump Administration must address without delay. How this latest "story" unfolded has become all too common in Washington. It's a manufactured crisis that puts our national security at risk.

    Let's hope Attorney General Sessions has impaneled a grand jury to investigate these troubling leaks. These leakers need to face criminal charges and face prosecution.

    The Trump Administration needs to send a strong message. It's time to seek out and prosecute those who are criminally leaking classified material.

    The fact is that many of those working to derail the Trump Administration work inside the federal government. They are part of the bureaucratic "swamp" and in many cases are loyal to President Obama and former Secretary of State Clinton

    They don't like the way the election turned out. And they really don't like that President Trump is in the Oval Office.

    There's no question that there's a deep state shadow government at work here. What we're experiencing is an unprecedented bureaucratic soft coup undermining our security.

    The Obama Administration took action to empower the entrenched bureaucracy to subvert our national security right before leaving office. It has led to dangerous leaks, criminal violations of the Espionage Act, and the creation of a shadow government to sabotage the new Administration.

    At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're directly engaged in half a dozen lawsuits to expose the shadow government and stop these dangerous national security leaks.

    It's time to plug the leaks and punish those who are responsible for leaking classified information.

    Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law. He's a New York Times bestselling author. Jay's latest book – "Unholy Alliance: The Agenda Iran, Russia, and Jihadists Share for Conquering the World" – is available now. He hosts "Jay Sekulow Live"-- a daily radio show which is broadcast on more than 850 stations nationwide as well as Sirius/XM satellite radio. Follow him on Twitter @JaySekulow .

    [May 17, 2017] Why Did the FBI Leak the Comey Memo naked capitalism

    May 17, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Paul Jay. On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that a memo written by James Comey states that President Trump asked Comey to drop the investigation into General Flynn. Now, this was all about Flynn's contacts with the Russians. He had attended an RT � the Russian television network � dinner in Moscow, he apparently held some discussions there, he was paid for attending that dinner. He also did some lobbying on behalf of Turkey and was paid for that, and the investigation also has to do with whether Flynn has something to do with the alleged interference of the Russians in the American elections. And this is a big breach of etiquette for a president to More than etiquette, I suppose � protocol, even the law � to tell an FBI director not to investigate something. I guess that's illegal. Trump, of course, and the White House denies this.

    But underlying all of this, and all the furor, is a fundamental assumption. It's a term that's used constantly in the media and by the various political pundits on the media, which is "Russia is our adversary." You have to basically assume that the adversary, Russia, has an antagonistic relationship with the United States, and then underneath all of that, then you have Flynn and Comey investigation and so on. Because if Russia isn't the great adversary, then it's unlikely there'd be such a to-do about all of this.

    Now joining us to talk about the Comey affair, the Trump affair, and just what is the issues in terms of the US-Russia relationship, is Robert English. Robert is a professor of international relations at the University of Southern California. He specializes in Russian and post-Soviet politics, US-Russian relations, and national security policy. He formerly worked for the US Department of Defense and the Committee for National Security, and has published widely in both academic and policy journals. Thanks very much for joining us, Robert.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: Happy to be here.

    PAUL JAY: Okay, so every day another storm, another drama. First of all, what do you make of Maybe the most interesting thing in all of this Comey thing today isn't Trump asking him to stop the investigation; that's not a great shocker. The more interesting thing is somebody at the FBI who has access to the Comey memo reads it to a journalist at the New York Times. There's a lot of people out to get Trump here.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: Yeah, you're pointing to this larger problem, which is this chaos, this infighting, and not just in a sort of careerist bureaucratic way, but a kind of serious pitched battle between different factions � in this case, between those in the Trump administration who seem to want a fresh start with Russia, to try to begin cooperation on things like Syria, terrorism, and so forth, and those dead set against it, who are now using leaks and so forth to In part, to fight their battles. And so the bureaucratic, the nasty, the backstabbing, the leaking, is one area of issues, but you're pointing to this larger fundamental. Can we get along with Russia? Is it worth trying to reset relations? And even if he's not the best executor so far � and he's not � is Trump's basic idea of "We can get along with Russia, let's give it a try" a good one? And I happen to think it is; it's just being carried out awfully clumsily.

    PAUL JAY: Yeah, I think one needs to separate the intent of Trump for wanting better relation with Russia, which one can analyze, and the policy itself. The policy of having a détente, although why there even needs to be a détente is kind of a question mark But why is so much of the American foreign policy establishment, the political class, the military leadership, the vast majority of that whole stratum wants to maintain a very antagonistic position towards Russia, and why?

    ROBERT ENGLISH: You know, four or five reasons that all come together, pushing in this Russophobic direction. We've always had sort of unreconstructed Cold Warriors, people who never were easy with the new Russia, right? Zbigniew Brzezinski and people of that ilk, who wanted to just push Russia in a corner, take advantage of its weakness, never give it a chance. Then you have people in the military-industrial complex, for lack of a better term, whose vested interests lie in a continued rivalry, and continued arms-racing, and continued threat inflation. You have other people who normally would be liberal progressive, but they're so angry at Hillary Clinton's loss, they're so uncomprehending of how someone they see as vulgar and unqualified as Trump could get elected, that they're naturally unwilling to let go of this "the Russians hacked our election, the Russians got Trump elected" theme, and therefore, Russia is even bigger enemy than they would be otherwise. These and other strains all come together in a strange way. Some of this is the hard right, all right? Some of it is from the left, some is from the center. And across the board, we have ignorance. Ignorance of Russia.

    PAUL JAY: Now, in an article you wrote recently, you went through some of the history, and we're going to do another segment that digs into this history more in depth, but when you look at the history of the '90s, and Yeltsin, and the whole role of the United States in helping bring down the Soviet Union, the whole point of bringing down the Soviet Union, and standing Yeltsin up, and interfering in Russian elections to make sure Yeltsin wins, and so on, was to open Russia for privatization for American oligarchs. I don't think the idea was to do it for Russian oligarchs, but that's how it turned out. Is that part of what is making this section of the American oligarchs so angry about it all?

    ROBERT ENGLISH: You know, when people look at Russia today, they try to explain it in terms of one evil man, Putin, and that sort of conceals an assumption that if we could just get rid of Putin, everything would be better, and that Putin is the way he is � anti-American � because he's from the KGB. You don't need to go back to his youth or his time in intelligence to understand why he's very skeptical, why we have bad relations with Putin and all those around him. You don't have to go back to the '50s or '40s. You can go back just to the '90s, when we interfered in Russia, when we foisted dysfunctional economic policies on them, when we meddled in their elections repeatedly, and basically for an entire decade, we were handmaidens to a catastrophe � economic, political, social � that sowed the seeds of this resentment that continues to this day. It's a-

    PAUL JAY: Yeah, you mention in your article that the consequences of the '90s depression in Russia far surpassed anything in the '07-'08 recession in the United States.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: They far surpassed that. They even far surpassed anything in our own Great Depression of the early 1930s, of '29, '30, '31 � you know, the Great Depression, under Hoover and then Roosevelt. At that time, our economy contracted by about a quarter, and the slump lasted about three years before growth resumed. Russia's economy contracted almost by half, and the slump lasted an entire decade, and it resulted not just in widespread poverty, but millions of excess deaths, of suicides, of people dying of despair, of heart disease, of treatable illnesses caused by the strains, the This deep, unbelievable misery of that decade. It's no wonder that there is deep resentment towards the US, and this underlies a lot of the Putin elites' attitudes towards us. It's not something pathological, Putin being a bad guy. If you got rid of Putin tomorrow, the next guy who came along, the person most Russians would probably elect in democratic elections, wouldn't be so different. It wouldn't be another Yeltsin or pro-Western liberal, believe me.

    PAUL JAY: Well, even if everything they say about Putin is true, and I doubt and Quite sure not everything is true. If he is such a dictator, United States foreign policy has never had any trouble with dictators, as long as they're our dictators, so the thing drips with hypocrisy.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: Hypocrisy and double standards all around are what Russians see, okay? I mean, where do you begin? Look at the recent The vote, the referendum in Crimea to secede from Ukraine, and of course, then Russia annexed it into Russian territory, and we find that outrageous, a violation of international law, and the Russians say, "Yeah, and what did you engineer in Kosovo? You yanked Kosovo out of Serbia, you caused Kosovo to secede from Serbia with no referendum, no international law. How is that different? Right? When it's your client state it's okay, but when it's ours, it's not?" And of course the list is a long one; we could spend all afternoon going through them. So the first thing we need to do is stop the sanctimony, and deal with Russia as an equal great power.

    But, you know, can I say one more thing about the '90s that connect it with what's going on today? In 1991, we had George Herbert Walker Bush in the White House. It was still the Soviet Union, Gorbachev was still in power for the rest of the year, and a warning came from our ambassador in Moscow, Jack Matlock, which was passed on to the White House. He had inside information from sources, from confidential sources, that a coup attempt was being planned. And, by the way, of course it happened in August of that year. That information came from our Ambassador Matlock, from his sources in Moscow, to the White House. George Bush had been instructed that this was highly sensitive, do not reveal the source of the information, keep it confidential. Bush fouled up, and within hours, he got on the phone to Moscow, a line that was open, monitored by the KGB, trying to reach Gorbachev, and he revealed the information, and he revealed the source, which went straight to the KGB. This was an unbelievable breach of confidentiality, dangerous, potentially deadly results, and the greatest irony is that George Herbert Walker Bush had been Director of the CIA before.

    Now, why am I telling this story? Obviously, my first point is, presidents have fouled up, and have declassified unwittingly, or sometimes for political purposes, highly sensitive information all the time. I'm not excusing what Trump did � it looks like he was very sloppy � but the first thing to note is it's not unusual, this happens a lot. The second thing, and let's talk about this, is sharing information intelligence with the Russians. Guys, we've been doing this for nearly 20 years. After 9/11, the Russians offered us valuable intelligence on the Taliban, on Afghanistan, to help us fight back against bin Laden, and we've been exchanging intelligence on terrorists ever since. A lot of people wish we'd exchange more information; we might have prevented the Boston bombing. So this hysteria about sharing intelligence with our adversary, no, we are cooperating with Russia because we have a common enemy.

    PAUL JAY: Now, I said in the beginning that I thought we should separate Trump's intent from a policy, which seems more rational, not to treat Russia as such an adversary, and try to work both in Syria and other places, negotiate more things out. But when you do look at the side of intent, I don't think you can negate or forget about the kind of historic ties that Trump has with Russian oligarchs. Some people suggest Russian Mafia. Tillerson's energy play, they would love sanctions lifted on Russia, and I'm not suggesting they shouldn't be lifted, but the motive here is they want to do a massive play in the energy sector. So it's not I don't think we should forget about what drives Trump and his circle around him, which is they have a very big fossil fuel agenda and a money-making agenda. On the other hand, that doesn't mean the policy towards Russia isn't rational. I mean, what do you I don't know if you agree or not.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: You know, yeah, you're right, those are important points, and whether you agree or not with people ranging from Ron Wyden to Lindsey Graham, they're all saying "follow the money," and in this case, I think they're right. All these probes, and all these suspicions that the Trump team colluded with Russian intelligence to throw the election, that they were cooperating, even coordinating with the Russians on the hacking, and then the release, I don't believe it. It could be true � you know, I don't have access to the evidence � but to me, it seems much more likely that what will turn up instead are financial crimes or malfeasance. People taking speaker's fees, people consulting with oligarchs, people aiding You know, helping with the elections with shady people, and depositing the money in the Cayman Islands or in Cypriot banks, not declaring income. I think that's what we're likely to find; I think that's probably what Flynn is guilty of. But the more serious charge of collusion with an adversary, even of treason to undermine our election, I doubt it very much. You're right to look at the energy business money, and sort of big-business oligarchic efforts to just get rich together.

    PAUL JAY: Yeah, because this is so much tied up with partisan politics. The Democratic Party leadership, you know, Schumer types, they just want to wound Trump any way they can, and this is a good way to cut some knives there, to get their knives out. But the real story is the financial shenanigans, and maybe Flynn was on to that. I'm not Excuse me, not Flynn, Comey. Maybe Comey was on to that, and maybe that's where this thing will lead. That's where Trump needs to fear, not the Flynn stuff.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: I think you're probably right, and again, I can only infer what might be going on, what evidence there might be, based on the subpoenas that are going out, but what we've heard says yeah, financial records, all these documents, evidence of I mean, let's go back to this issue that was the scandal of the week about five scandals ago, which means five days ago, and that was that The reason that Flynn was fired, you'll recall that after the election but before the inauguration, he met with the Russian ambassador, and they discussed all kinds of policy issues, including the possibility of moving towards removing the sanctions. When he got back to the White House, apparently he told Pence that they talked about other things, but he didn't admit that the sanctions subject had come up. Therefore, he lied; therefore, he was fired. And Sally Yates, right, the From the Attorney General's office, has made an important point that she briefed the White House on this, she warned that Flynn had been compromised, because the Russians had something on him now.

    Okay, technically they did, but come on, guys, hold on a second. Trump was about to be inaugurated, right? It wasn't as if he somehow � Flynn � could undermine a policy of Obama's when there were about five minutes left in the Obama administration. Secondly, the Russians and the Trump administration wanted openly � it was no secret � to move towards a removal of sanctions if they could find cooperation on Ukraine, cooperation on terror in the Middle East. There's no secret here. Therefore, what did the Russians have on Flynn that they could have blackmailed him with? How was he compromised? Yeah, because they'd caught him in a fib, but big deal. You see how these things are being exaggerated. No doubt Flynn broke the rules, he told a lie, but it's not a lie It's not the kind of information in the Russians' possession that's the equivalent of catching him in bed with another woman, or [inaudible 00:16:53].

    PAUL JAY: And you have to even believe that he did tell the lie, because we're being told he didn't tell Pence. We don't know if he's falling on his sword to some extent here in order to protect Pence. I mean, who knows the truth of any of that? And the rest of what he did, as far as we know, with the Russians is all public. There's a video of him speaking at an RT interview in Moscow that took place at the same time as this dinner that he was paid to attend on the 10th anniversary of RT, where he sits near Putin. There's nothing secret about any of this; this stuff's been out on YouTube for, like, ages.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: So what you have here when you add them up is a sequence of events or small misdeeds: telling a fib about this here, Trump leaking classified information there. None of them are of the magnitude that they're being portrayed with in the media, but when you string them together, it sounds like a hysterical series of

    PAUL JAY: So I can understand the Democratic Party, but in terms of what people call the permanent state, the deep state, they're very engaged in this. The leaks from the FBI We still don't, I don't think, unless I missed something, this thing where he Trump talks to the Russian ambassador and the Foreign Minister, Lavrov, and gives this Reveals this intelligence. Well, how do we know that? I mean, who's in that room that leaked that? Or, apparently, after it took place in Washington, some White House staffers phone the NSA and the CIA. Well, you think they've got to call the heads of these organizations at this kind of level of information. So who's leaking that stuff? The state apparatus � CIA, FBI, maybe NSA � they're really antagonistic to this Trump administration. What is that about?

    ROBERT ENGLISH: Again, that's where we started, with not only the battle over "Should we try to improve relations with Russia, or are they incorrigible foes?" That's one thing, but now this sort of bureaucratic infighting, the use of leaks, of innuendo. And again, Trump gives them the fuel to do so with these continual misdeeds and misstatements. That's another whole arena of battle, and it's not healthy, right, to have And it's his fault too. He went to war with the intelligence community on day one. But this is so dysfunctional. It's causing us much more harm than the Russians ever could, and

    PAUL JAY: We're going to keep this conversation going in a future segment. I do want to add Anyone who watches The Real News knows this already. I mean, I think the Trump/Pence administration is going to prove to be more dangerous than the Bush/Cheney. I think it's extremely dangerous what they have in mind in terms of foreign policy. But all that being said, let's concentrate on the real stuff. Trump's in Saudi Arabia, and they're planning some bad stuff in the Middle East, and targeting of Iran, and back here, we're focusing on really what should be a sideline soap opera.

    ROBERT ENGLISH: Yeah. The series, the daily scandals that we're talking about � the Comey letter today, the leak to the Russians yesterday, on and on � are kind of distracting us from the bigger picture. Not only the question of, you know, what are our common interests, if any, with Russia, and can we seriously work towards them, but also, what are we going to do in the Middle East, and what are we doing in East Asia? These pivotal foreign policy strategic issues aren't getting much attention because of the daily soap opera. You're absolutely right.

    Let me just add at the end here � I know we're running out of time � I've noted the accidental clumsy careless leak that could've had tragic consequences of the first Bush president. We might also note that the second Bush presidency, that administration leaked like a sieve from, you know, exaggerated false intelligence on Iraq to the identity of Valerie Plame, a CIA operative, when it suited their purposes. And the Obama administration wasn't a lot better. People like McCain and others were furious at some of the leaks, whether it was the Stuxnet cyber war tactic that was used against Iran, to a whole series of other military facts that were leaked selectively by the Obama administration to serve their purposes. Let's just remember this context. Mistaken leaks, strategic leaks, dishonest leaks go on all the time in Washington, and against that backdrop, let's not fall off the cliff here over Trump sharing some intel about terror attacks with the Russians, about our common enemy, the Islamic State in Syria.

    PAUL JAY: All right, thanks very much for joining us, and thank you for joining us on The Real News Network. Anonymous , May 17, 2017 at 2:09 am

    Some issues that are not mentioned. First, the 100 billion dollar a year cost of sanctions which gives Putin and the oligarchs incentive to do a lot of things. Second, the track record of journalists, human rights advocates and attorneys being killed in Russia. Third, the funds paid to Trump from oligarchs via over priced real estate deals.
    Guess they all fall into the "strategic issues aren't getting much attention".
    If the Putin administration or oligarchs are found to have acted illegally in the US it will be a different discussion.

    [Apr 01, 2017] Money that Poured in from Russia Economic Principals

    Notable quotes:
    "... The Wall Street Journal ..."
    "... Bloomberg Businessweek ..."
    "... The New York Times ..."
    Apr 01, 2017 | www.economicprincipals.com
    March 26, 2017
    Having spent the last six months preparing a history of Harvard University's mission to Moscow in the 1990s and the scandal that ensued (to appear sometime this summer), I have often been reminded of William Faulkner's apothegm : "The past is never dead. It's not even past." This is as true of the Trump-Russia story as it is of the larger and more intricate realm of US-Russia relations since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    Holman Jenkins, Jr., the least predictable columnist at The Wall Street Journal , noted last week (subscription required) that Watergate analogies in the Trump Russia controversy are beside the point. What is wanted, he wrote, is a Pentagon Papers-style history of US policy, "an emptying out of the files" necessary to illuminate the "awkward, contradictory and humiliating straddles" of Western governments over the last twenty-five years.

    Alas, we are unlikely to get that kind of retrospective from WikiLeaks. What is required instead is a great deal of shoe-leather reporting. An especially good example was to be found ten days ago in The Rich Refugees Who Saved Trump , by Caleb Melby and Keri Geiger, with Michael Smith, Alexander Sazenov, and Polly Mosendz, writing in Bloomberg Businessweek .

    When Trump World Tower at 845 United Nations Plaza began construction two decades ago as the tallest residential building in the country (90 stories), its most expensive floors attracted wealthy people getting their money out of what had been the Soviet Union. Trump needed the big spenders. He was renegotiating $1.8 billion in junk bonds for his Atlantic City resorts, and the tower was built on a mountain of debt owed to German banks.

    The story is the most plausible account I've yet seen of what Trump's oldest son, Donald Jr., may have meant when he said, in 2008, "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia." In the earlier case reported by BBw , the deluge occurred at a most propitious time, in the late 1990s, when Trump's business was stretched thin and under stress.

    Trump broke ground on the building in October 1998, across the street from the United Nations headquarters. After several years of boisterous churn and at long last some growth, the Russian economy was in crisis. The ruble had collapsed in August; the government had defaulted on its domestic debt. Savvy Russians had scrambled to get their money out of the country. From the article:

    Real Estate provides a safe haven for overseas investors. It has few reporting requirements and is a preferred way to move cash of questionable provenance. Amid the turmoil, buyers found a dearth of available projects. Trump World Tower, opened in 2001, became a prominent depository of Russian money.

    Others who bought units in the building, with its 72 constructed floors and 90 stories listed on its elevator panels, included New York Yankee shortstop Derek Jeter, Bill Gates, Harrison Ford, Sophia Loren, and Kellyanne Conway and her husband, according to Wikipedia. BBw reported that

    The very top floors remained unsold for years but a third of the units sold on floors 76 through 83 by 2004 involved people or limited liability corporations connected to Russia and neighboring states, a Bloomberg investigation shows. The reporting involved more than two dozen interviews and a review of hundreds of public records in New York.

    Trump scholars gradually will determine how material was the sales boost in the complicated ups-and-downs of Trump's financial position in those days. For an explication of some of the favors owed, which in one case went back to 1976, see the current article . This much is indelibly clear: the president has seen Russia as a prime source of revenue, if not investment, for twenty years. Again, BBw:

    Simultaneous with when the tower was going up, developer Gil Dezer and his father, Michael, were building a Trump-backed condo project in Sunny Isles Beach, Fla. "Russians love the Trump brand," [Dezer] says, adding that Russians and Russian Americans bought some 200 of the 2,000 units in Trump buildings he built. They flooded into Trump projects from 2001 to 2007, helping Trump weather the real estate collapse, he says.

    A similar situation, this one involving a troubled midtown Manhattan building owned by Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and a billionaire Chinese would-be investor, was covered in some detail earlier this month by The New York Times and the WSJ (subscription required). The next step is to follow Bloomberg's team in tracing Trump's dealings with Russians back in time.

    My hunch is that the WSJ's Jenkins is right, that the 2016 campaign-collusion story will turn out to be a dead end. Much more interesting is the saga of the formation of Trump's views of Russia over the last twenty-five years

    [Feb 27, 2017] Rogue Bureaucrats at Homeland Security Leak Report Critical of Trump

    Notable quotes:
    "... Rogue bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security have leaked an "incomplete" report critical of President Trump's executive order that temporarily blocked the issuance of visas to seven Middle Eastern countries that previous administrations had declared "sponsors of state terrorism" or countries of concern. ..."
    "... "AP Exclusive: DHS report disputes threat from banned nations." ..."
    "... A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security would neither confirm nor deny that Grannis was the author of, or had reviewed, the leaked draft document, though it did appear to be authored by someone associated with his area of responsibility within DHS. ..."
    Feb 27, 2017 | www.breitbart.com
    Rogue bureaucrats at the Department of Homeland Security have leaked an "incomplete" report critical of President Trump's executive order that temporarily blocked the issuance of visas to seven Middle Eastern countries that previous administrations had declared "sponsors of state terrorism" or countries of concern.

    Based on that leaked document, the Associated Press published a story on Friday with the headline "AP Exclusive: DHS report disputes threat from banned nations."

    WASHINGTON (AP) - Analysts at the Homeland Security Department's intelligence arm found insufficient evidence that citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries included in President Donald Trump's travel ban pose a terror threat to the United States.

    A draft document obtained by The Associated Press concludes that citizenship is an "unlikely indicator" of terrorism threats to the United States and that few people from the countries Trump listed in his travel ban have carried out attacks or been involved in terrorism-related activities in the U.S. since Syria's civil war started in 2011.

    Click here to see the leaked document. ... ... ...

    Last week, Breitbart News reported that David Grannis, Principal Deputy Undersecretary for Intelligence and Analysis in the Office of Intelligence and Analysis at the Department of Homeland Security, is a holdover Obama bureaucrat who President Trump could remove from his position immediately:

    A lifelong Democrat, "[p]rior to joining DHS, Mr. Grannis served as the Staff Director of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) from 2009 through 2014 and as the Minority Staff Director for 2015. During this time, he served as the principal intelligence advisor to SSCI Chairman Dianne Feinstein and SSCI Members and led the Committee's efforts to produce and enact annual Intelligence Authorization Act from 2010 through 2016 and the Cybersecurity Act of 2015, according to the DHS website.

    He has spent his career working for partisan Democratic members of Congress:

    He previously served as a staff designee to Senator Feinstein on the SSCI from 2005 until 2009 with a varied portfolio of committee responsibilities. Mr. Grannis worked on the House Select Committee on Homeland Security with responsibilities for intelligence, aviation security, and science and technology from 2003 to 2005 and was Senior Policy Advisor to Representative Jane Harman on matters of national security from 2001 to 2003.

    A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security would neither confirm nor deny that Grannis was the author of, or had reviewed, the leaked draft document, though it did appear to be authored by someone associated with his area of responsibility within DHS.

    [Feb 19, 2017] Video: The Revolution Business: Does the USA Sponsor "Color Revolutions" and "Regime Change"?

    Notable quotes:
    "... IS YOUR COUNTRY MARKED FOR A COLOR REVOLUTION? Democratic change has been demanded across the Middle East. But was what seems like a spontaneous revolution actually a strategically planned event, fabricated by 'revolution consultants' long in advance? ..."
    "... from Journeyman Pictures, Global Research: ..."
    "... Revolution consultants are the worst nightmare of every regime. Srdja Popovic was a founder of the organisation 'Otpor', a revolution training school. It was instrumental in the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s and has now inspired a new generation of activists. ..."
    "... Political commentators like William Engdahl are convinced Otpor is being financed by the USA. ..."
    "... "The people from Otpor gave us a book in which they described all their strategies", says Ezzedine Zaatour of the Tunisian uprising. That book was written by an American, Gene Sharp, and is now considered the "revolution guide book", being used by opposition movements worldwide. ..."
    "... As Optor release their latest gadget, a resistance training computer game sponsored by American organisations, world leaders are voicing their concerns. "This is called a gentle coup!", insists Hugo Chavez. ..."
    "... Journeyman Pictures is your independent source for the world's most powerful films, exploring the burning issues of today. We represent stories from the world's top producers, with brand new content coming in all the time. On our channel you'll find outstanding and controversial journalism covering any global subject you can imagine wanting to know about. For downloads and more information visit: http://journeyman.tv/62012/short-film ..."
    Feb 19, 2017 | theinternationalreporter.org
    April 6, 2016

    IS YOUR COUNTRY MARKED FOR A COLOR REVOLUTION? Democratic change has been demanded across the Middle East. But was what seems like a spontaneous revolution actually a strategically planned event, fabricated by 'revolution consultants' long in advance?

    from Journeyman Pictures, Global Research:

    Revolution consultants are the worst nightmare of every regime. Srdja Popovic was a founder of the organisation 'Otpor', a revolution training school. It was instrumental in the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s and has now inspired a new generation of activists.

    Political commentators like William Engdahl are convinced Otpor is being financed by the USA.

    "The people from Otpor gave us a book in which they described all their strategies", says Ezzedine Zaatour of the Tunisian uprising. That book was written by an American, Gene Sharp, and is now considered the "revolution guide book", being used by opposition movements worldwide.

    As Optor release their latest gadget, a resistance training computer game sponsored by American organisations, world leaders are voicing their concerns. "This is called a gentle coup!", insists Hugo Chavez.

    watch-v=lpXbA6yZY-8

    Transcript:

    Script: Revolution 00:01

    Democracy awakens In the Middle East. But what seems like a spontaneous revolution was actually a strategically planned event, fabricated by professional consultants long in advance.

    00:11 IV William Engdahl (Sound bite English)

    00:16
    These revolution consultants are the worst nightmare of every regime.

    00:21 IV Hugo Chavez
    Here you can see the symbol of the resistance!

    00:24
    These revolution consultants are funded and supported by American organisations.

    00:28 IV Srdja Popovic (Sound bite English)

    00:31
    These revolution consultants mainly operate in countries in which the western world has a clear interest. Hardly a coincidence it seems.

    00:42 IV Gene Sharp (sound bite English)

    00:48

    00:55
    Cairo in early February: The sudden appearance of the wild horseman at this demonstration shocked the world over. These aggressors on their horses stormed into the crowd and split the peaceful demonstration apart. What seemed like a brutal attack by representative of the old Mubarak regime was actually a staged affair. It was intended for the national and international Media. The Message: Egypt is in a state of Chaos.

    01:20
    Provoked by these false attacks, demonstrators reacted with violence and so the situation escalated. Always at the forefront: the members of �The Movement of the 6th of April. These men have been carefully trained for tenuous situations like this.

    01:40
    Right from the start the revolution consultants follow a specific strategy. A strategy developed by the Serbian Otpor organisation. The Organisation responsible for the downfall of Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic. This strategy, successful in Serbia in the 90s, became a blueprint. It proved successful once again when used for the revolution in Egypt.

    02:05
    IV OT Mohamed Adel, Activist, �the movement of the 6th of April�
    Otpor organised workshops in the outskirts of Cairo. In these workshops we were trained in the art of peaceful resistance. We had to learn that the police are not our enemy and that we must try to get them on our side. We had to impress people with the idea of non-violent resistance.

    02:37

    02:39
    Opposition movements from all over the world come to the Serbian Capital of Belgrade to be educated in the art of overthrowing a dictatorship. The Serbs succeeded with their own revolution 12 years ago. They now use their experience for their revolution training school �the centre of strategy for non violent resistance� or for short Canvas.

    Chief instructor Srdja Popovic is one of the few Canvas members who would show his face publicly in front of the camera. It was in his office where the Egyptian revolution was planned.

    03:14 IV Srdja Popovic , Revolution Trainer (Soubite English)

    03:26 (fast!)
    It wasn�t just Egyptians that trained here. Revolution training is high in demand these days.

    03:31 IV Srdja Popovic (English sound bite)

    03:58
    In the 90�s, Srdja Popovic organised street demonstrations against Milosevic. He started Otpor as a youth movement with some of his fellow students.
    From these beginnings, he was able to mobilise millions of people with his impressive enterprises. The financial support is coming from the USA.

    04:02
    Film: �Bringing down a Dictator�

    04:29
    Add: I had already tried everything to get rid of him. Now I found something that does the trick.

    04:37
    It works!

    04:31
    Text insert

    04:41
    Here, in front of the Belgrade parliament was the trial run for Otpor with many other Revolutions to follow.

    04:49 question Reporter (in English)

    04:52 IV, Srdja Popovic Democracy Activist (sound bite English)

    05:14
    After Milosevic�s downfall, Otpor became an international phenomenon. The symbol of the fist reappears all over the world as the signature of the revolution makers.

    Established in Serbia, the fist re-emerged in Kumara, Georgia, followed by Oborona in Russia, then in Venezuela and Iran, and at last it was used by the opposition groups in Egypt.

    05:40
    The American author and Princeton University Lecturer, William Engdahl, has written for over 30 years about Washington�s secret geo-politics. He has established a widespread information network that extends deep into America�s secret service. He is convinced – Otpor is not acting alone.

    05:59 IV William Engdahl, Author (Soundbite English)

    06:43

    06:44

    In New York we are meeting again with Srdja Popovic. We want to find out if the Otpor organisation is actually following a secret agenda of the United States.

    06:55

    But to our disappointment Popovic is reluctant to talk about his arrangements with American organisations.

    The Otpor movement was indeed financed by American tax money during the Serbian revolution. A fact that only became public knowledge after Milosevic�s downfall. This chapter however is one that Otpor is keen to close.

    07:13 IV Srdja Popovic, revolution �trainer (soundbite English)

    08:08
    Columbia University invited Popovic as a guest lecturer.

    08;15 Srdja Popovic (Sound bite English)

    08:22
    The guest from Serbia enlightens the students on the truth behind the changes in the Middle East. Who was actually behind it all? Popovic himself knew for years, but only now can he talk about it publicly.

    08:39 IV Srdja Popovic (Soundbite English)

    08:56

    09:00
    The old city of Tunis. The Tunisians were the first in the Arab world to overthrown their government. Yet the euphoria about their dictators downfall was hardly noticeable. The uncertainty of the political future leaves the Tunisian population anxious.

    For decades the people of Tunisia were oppressed by Ben Ali�s totalitarian ruling. These days the capital seems to be dominated by a loud and harsh atmosphere. Its people agitated yet overwhelmed by their freedom. The centre of the town appears like a Roman forum: everywhere heated discussions about politics.
    The new generation wants change. Most of the young people are well educated; they see themselves as westerners.

    09:45
    Until recently scenes like this were thought impossible. Suddenly the fear is gone � at least during the moment of revolt. The people are standing up; finally the world recognises the desperate political situation of their State.

    Amine Ghali has been an activist from the start. He shows us the photographs of a meeting in Morocco which was the beginning of a long hoped for change in Tunisian history.

    10`16 IV Amine Ghali, Freedom House, Kawakibi Democracy Transition Center, Tunis (Soundbite English)

    10:58
    The time was ripe for a �revolution test run�. Discontentment with the political situation had been growing amongst the population for years. Life in the slums had become desperate. Lack of food and medical care left the people without any perspective for a better future. With living conditions going from bad to worse, the Tunisians could hide their anger no more The activists saw their opportunity, they used this anger to achieve their goal: the overthrowing of Ben Alis regime.

    11:28
    OT Ezzedine Zaatour, U.G.E.T. Student Union, Tunis
    In a way we have done the same that they did In Belgrade in the 90s. Non-violent resistance, the ridicule of the regime. There was no violence on the street even when the police intervened, we did not fight. The people from Otpor gave us a book in which they described all their strategies, how you have to proceed when you want to overthrow a regime.

    11:50
    That book, which is used by opposition movements worldwide, was actually written in Boston USA. Here is one of the intellectual centres of democracy activists.

    The book �From Dictatorship to Democracy� is considered the Bible of the non-violent resistance.

    The author of this �revolution guide book� lives in one of the working class neighbourhoods in the outskirts of Boston.

    12:18
    83 year old Gene Sharp wrote this masterpiece. It contains 198 methods of non-violent action.

    12:26 IV Gene Sharp, Author (Soundbite English)

    12:50
    Gene Sharp taught many years at Harvard University. His work describes various strategies from Hunger Strike to the unmasking of intelligence officials.
    His assistant, Jamila Rqip, has the main duty to distribute Sharpe's work. His Book �From Dictatorship to Democracy� has been translated into 34 languages.

    13:13 IV Jamila Raqip, Albert � Einstein -Institute. (Soundbite English)

    13:37
    Sharpe�s ?guide to Revolution� is feared by Dictators around the world. Venezuela�s president Chavez called Sharp a rabble rouser in the service of the CIA. In Russia the possession of the Book is considered a hostile act against the government.

    13:52 IV Gene Sharp, Albert �Einstein-Institute (Soundbite English)

    14:27 With Internet anybody has access to Sharps revolution strategies.

    14:34 IV William Engdahl, Author (Soundbite English)

    14:55
    Are all these revolutions actually initiated by the Americans?

    15:01
    We can look back at what happened during the �Orange Revolution� in the Ukraine for evidence. One has to acknowledge that the events that took place in Kiev in 2005 appear to endorse this assumption. Traditionally Ukraine was part of Russia, but by the end of 2004 the tide turned. The United Stated pumped millions of dollars into the countries opposition movements in the favour of regime change.

    15:26
    We are meeting with the two former leaders of the Ukraine revolution. Just by being a member of the opposition movement �PORA� they received significant sums of money, together with training in civil disobedience. Finally they were given a book.

    15:43
    IV Mychailo Swystowitsch, former ukraine activist

    Oh yes, the book by Gene Sharp. We all used it. And it connected us with everybody, with Otpor in Serbia, the opposition movement in Belarus and Kmara in Georgia.

    15:57

    15:59
    It was in November 2004 when hundreds of thousands of people flooded Independence Square in Kiev and demanding Viktor Yushchenko for their president. 16:10 At the end of the Revolution the crowd got what they demanded. Yushchenko become president due to the massive support he received from the western world.

    16:19 Soundbite Dmytro Poteschin, political consultant (Soundbite English)

    16:28

    16:31
    The Revolution as a happening, a celebration, this is the spirit of Gene Sharp. Every movement becomes a brand with its own symbolism: oranges in Ukraine, the Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Tulip revolution Kyrgyzstan in, the Denim Revolution in Belarus, all different symbols but the same concept and the same sponsor: The United States of America.

    16:51 IV Dmytro Potechin, Political Consultant (soundbite English)

    16;58 Question reporter (English)

    16:59 IV Dmytro Potechin , (Soundbite English)

    17:19

    17;21
    After the Revolution in Ukraine, Dmytro Potechin made a career from being a former activist; he works now as well as a revolution trainer. From his flat he instructs the opposition movements in Iran, Russian, Belarus, and Egypt. Via Skype he is able to stay in touch with all his clients.

    17:44 IV Dmytro Potechin , trainer for nonviolent resistance (Soundbite English)

    17:54

    17:57
    An Activist of the opposition movement in Belarus is online. Dmytro is planning a work shop over there, which is not without difficulties as he is labelled Persona non grata by the Belarus government

    18:11 IV Dmytro Potechin , trainer for nonviolent resistance (Soundbite English)

    18;40

    18:42
    Back in Belgrade, Otpor Trainer Ivan Marvic proudly presents his new gadget for the resistance training. It�s a computer game that simulates the fight against the power of state. Ivan is sure with that game will make his training much more effective.
    Sponsorship for the development of the game came from American organisations.

    19:04 Soundbite Ivan Marovic, Co-founder of Otpor (Soundbite English)

    19;48

    19;49
    Marovic declares, the new generation doesn�t want to read books, they would prefer to play video games, and it�s far more effective.

    19:58 Soundbite Ivan Marovic, (Soundbite English)

    20:03 Soundbite Ivan Marovic, (Soundbite English)

    20;05

    20:08 Soundbite Ivan Marovic, (Soundbite English)

    20:12

    20:14 Soundbite Ivan Marovic, Otpor trainer (Soundbite English)

    20:34

    20:35
    Despite the Internet the Revolution trainers spend most of their time travelling to countries in need of a well organised resistance. Just In the past year Srdja Popovic alone flew over 100.000 miles. His inside knowledge and experience is his capital.

    20:49 Soundbite Srdja Popovic, Otpor-founder Soundbite English

    21:29
    The Egyptians followed Srdja's rules exactly and succeeded.

    21:34

    21:39
    The whole world was watching as the people celebrated on Tahrir Square. The regime was powerless; if it had reacted with violence it would have lost its face in front of the whole international media.

    21:52 Soundbite William Egdahl, Author (Soundbite English)

    22:22

    22:23 George W. Bush former US – President 20th January 2004 (Soundbite English)

    22:28 Hillary Clinton US foreign �Minister 13th April 2011 (Soundbite English)

    22:32 George W. Bush former US � President 19th September 2006 (Soundbite English)

    22:36 William Hague, foreign secretary 8th February 2011 (Soundbite English)

    22:47 George W. Bush former US � President (Soundbite English)

    22:52
    Guido Westerwelle, German foreign Minister 6th February 2011
    You must not get the impression that what happens in the Streets of Cairo at the moment is initiated by the Western world or other foreign states.

    23:05

    23:07 The Iranian government produced this propaganda video.

    23:10

    23:12
    The video is apparently unmasking a US conspiracy group. Part of this secret gathering is Gene Sharp; author of the guide book �From Dictatorship to Democracy�. The video shows Iran is acutely aware of just how much of a threat Gene Sharp and his strategies are to their rule.

    23:30

    23:33 Venezuela�s President Hugo Chavez also voices his concerns.

    23:38

    23:40
    Soundbite Hugo Chavez
    Mr Cameraman come close, here the Symbol from Serbia and here the same in Venezuela in 2007.

    23:50 This is called a gentle coup!

    23:53

    24:05 (slow!)
    Cairo after the Revolution. The City seems quiet, apart from some religious upheaval. Remarkably few police or military forces are present. But everyday life is hard for the Egyptians. The constant fear of a counter-revolution is always at the forefront of their minds. Anyone and everyone is a suspect – a potential counter-revolutionary, who wants to bring back the old regime.

    24:35
    The old city is as vibrant as ever, only the tourist are missing. The people thoughts revolve around their immediate future � the upcoming elections. What will democracy bring for them? The established political parties? The military? Or the Islamic brotherhood? And then, what will be left from the spirit of the revolution � the hopes and dreams of the people of Egypt?

    25:13
    Adel
    The people that suggest that there was a big master plan behind this revolution; they don�t know what was going on in the streets of Egypt. We have witnessed what our country had become. We wanted the changes, and we wanted them to come from our midst. We want to be the creators of our own destinies, to fight for our rights. I cannot believe that the Americans can influence millions of people.

    25:40
    The people of Tunisian still enjoy the new freedom. For the first time they are able discuss publicly what has troubled them for decades � their former leader�s lies, the corruption, the unfair distribution of wealth. They are unsettled however, by the recent arrests of civilians and the curfews. Also the economy is a major concern for them. Tourism is slow and foreign investors see Tunisia as a risky endeavour.

    26:08 Soundbite Ghali (Soundbite English)

    26:53
    Soundbite Adel

    We are scared, especially if we are looking at the example of Romania. There was a revolt against their regime, but then the old potentate�s came back into power. We fear that something similar could happen over here. There have been talks about a counter revolution. We therefore request that everybody from the old regime who had been involved in criminal activities must now be brought to justice.

    27:13
    The revolutionary road to democracy is one filled with many obstacles. Once the overthrowing of a government is accomplished the hard work starts for these revolution activists. Civil liberties must be established and defended. For the revolution consultants this has become a very lucrative business.

    Journeyman Pictures is your independent source for the world's most powerful films, exploring the burning issues of today. We represent stories from the world's top producers, with brand new content coming in all the time. On our channel you'll find outstanding and controversial journalism covering any global subject you can imagine wanting to know about. For downloads and more information visit: http://journeyman.tv/62012/short-film

    [Feb 19, 2017] Forget Gene Sharp, John Carlarne Is The New Color Revolution Chief

    Feb 19, 2017 | off-guardian.org
    via The Duran

    Long thought of as being the 'godfather' of Color Revolutions, elderly Gene Sharp is stepping aside in favor of a much younger spiritual successor, John Carlarne.

    Color Revolutions are the epitome of post-modern warfare, and they've been successfully applied to devastating effect everywhere from Serbia to Syria. Whether as stand-alone regime change operations such as the one in 2003 Georgia or the catalyst to a Hybrid War like in 2011 Libya, Color Revolutions have arguably emerged as one of the US' preferred strategies of choice in destabilizing targeted states.

    The architect behind this new method of warfare is Gene Sharp, an expert in "non-violent resistance" strategies and the founder of the " Albert Einstein Institution ". He's published such works as " From Dictatorship To Democracy " and " There Are Realistic Alternatives ", both of which have been instrumental in honing Color Revolution organizational strategies and applied tactics. Largely credited with sparking the "Arab Spring" theater-wide Color Revolutions, Sharp is a 'god among men' when it comes to asymmetrical warfare methods, but his elderly age means that someone else must pick up the torch and continue his work once he inevitably passes away.

    A New Leader Rises

    Enter John Carlarne, an up-and-coming Color Revolution strategist from The Ohio State University's Mershon Center for International Security Studies . His publicly available CV indicates that he has a wealth of experience that's particularly relevant for this field. From serving around the world as a Commissioned Officer in the British Army from 1990-1995 to being the Vice-President of the Peace Brigades International (PBI) from 1997 to the present, Carlarne has been able to combine his military training with broad NGO activity in spearheading the new tactic of "protective accompaniment".

    PBI describes this concept as "send[ing] teams of volunteers backed up by an international support network to accompany human rights defenders and communities in areas of conflict", which basically boils down to using Western "volunteers" as literal human shields in protecting "democracy" and "human rights" (Color Revolution) activists during their provocations. Undoubtedly, Carlarne's military experience helped to optimize this strategy while his leadership role as the organization's Vice-President ensured that it would be rolled out, tested, and perfected in all of the countries where the group is active.

    PBI's activity in identity-diverse countries such as Kenya and Nepal dovetails nicely with Carlarne's educational interest in Anthropology, in which he received both a master's degree (1996) and a Ph.D. (2008). During his two-year time as the Associate Director of the University of South Carolina's Rule of Law Collaborative from 2009-2011, some of his self-declared responsibilities included "liaising with government, academic, practitioner and policy maker communities – both in the US and in Europe" and "advising government officials on working with nongovernmental organizations in post-conflict settings", both of which clearly gave him an impressive list of professional contacts that he would later leverage.

    Crafting The Color Revolution

    Right after serving at the Rule of Law Collaborative, Carlarne became the Peace Studies Coordinator at The Ohio State University in 2011, a position that he retains to this day alongside his Vice-Presidential one with the PBI. The Mershon Center describes a research project that Carlarne is leading called " Training To Talk Peace: Experimental Analysis Of Non-Violent Communication Workshops ", which utilizes local diaspora communities to "act as a proxy for populations in their countries of origin" in assessing the effect that an extensive six-week "non-violent communication curriculum" has on the participants' "identity structure, interpersonal reactivity, and views on the use of coercive or punitive methods in a divisive political dispute."

    The purpose of the experiment is to gauge the effectiveness of Color Revolution information campaigns in recruiting regime change cells inside of the targeted country and in magnifying the sense of identity-separateness that varied demographics feel towards the said diverse state. To put it in a simpler way, Carlarne tests the applicability of fomenting identity conflict all across the world, likely in accordance with " The Law Of Hybrid War " which states that "the grand objective behind every Hybrid War is to disrupt multipolar transnational connective projects through externally provoked identity conflicts (ethnic, religious, regional, political, etc.) within a targeted transit state."

    His anthropological expertise is then harnessed in judging whether the experiment's results indicate that a given strategy should move forward, and if such a determination is made, then the PBI begins in-field testing against the target. Although the PBI's front page says that it only has "current field projects in Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico and Nepal", its section about Country Groups notes that "many countries do not have an official PBI Country Group but have small networks of individuals that may be able to help." To elaborate, one of the key functions of a Country Group "is developing and activating support networks that provide a vital lifeline if the human rights defenders PBI accompanies are threatened", which "consists of high-level contacts such as diplomats, members of government, and officials, and well-known personalities."

    If the Country Group's responsibilities make it sound an awful lot like an intelligence agency, it's because it essentially is, and it's reasonable to conclude that the PBI might actually be a CIA front organization. Carlarne's extensive contacts "with government, academic, practitioner and policy maker communities – both in the US and in Europe" and the government officials that he has formerly advised enable him to provide a wide range of relevant policy influencers and decision makers with the results of his field data, thus establishing a valuable Color Revolution feedback mechanism that seamlessly integrates theoreticians, practitioners, and policy makers. Carlarne's multi-layered regime change platform surpasses the precedent that was set by Gene Sharp and demonstrates how academia, private sector "volunteers", and government agencies can all be fused together in an effective operational mix.

    Training The Next Generation

    Carlarne's activities are also very forward-looking, not just in the sense of fomenting Color Revolutions and Hybrid Wars in targeted states, but in training a new generation of strategists to join his PBI organization and/or the American Intelligence Community. He presently teaches a class at The Ohio State University called " Applied Nonviolence ", where he writes that students "will select candidate countries for nonviolent transition" and "then apply the principles, concepts and practices of nonviolence within a notional setting in order to explore the strengths and limitations of nonviolence as a method for effecting long-term change within specific regimes."

    This program amounts to a series of targeted simulations in which Carlarne uses students as unwitting research assistants for his work while simultaneously seeking to indoctrinate future recruits with his Color Revolution ideology. He's currently building the " Peace Education And Training Repository " (PETR), "an online data portal designed to document peace education training curricula and materials from around the world" and which "combines information about global research, education, and peace-building programs that affect community, national and international peace and security."

    The end vision is that "the repository will form the core resource for lifelong peace leadership education", with one of the key objectives being to "attract participation from practitioners, researchers and policy makers alike". In other words, Carlarne is constructing a Color Revolution factory that aims to continually produce strategists, activists, and policy facilitators in order to dish out a never-ending stream of "democratic" and "human rights" destabilization anywhere in the world. Needless to say, PETR is on track to become the new-and-improved version of the "Albert Einstein Institute", and John Carlarne is already a lot more successful than Gene Sharp ever was in directly cultivating Color Revolution networks, fielding experimental techniques in practice, and coordinating his activities with the military-intelligence community.

    Recommended Links

    Softpanorama hot topic of the month

    Softpanorama Recommended

    ...

    Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections - Wikipedia



    Etc

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes.   If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. 

    ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.  

    Society

    Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

    Quotes

    War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

    Bulletin:

    Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

    History:

    Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

    Classic books:

    The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

    Most popular humor pages:

    Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

    The Last but not Least


    Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.

    The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

    Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

    FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

    This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

    You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info

    Disclaimer:

    The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.

    Last modified: June, 17, 2017